Cornell University Library HD 1313.S74 . The singletax and the labor movement 3 1924 002 346 207 THE LIBRARY OF THE NEW YORK STATE SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR RELATIONS AT CORNELL UNIVERSITY Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924002346207 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISClONSIN XtO. 878 Economics and Political Science Seiie*. Vol. s. No. •, pp. 347-426 THE SINGLETAX AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT BY PETER ALEXANDER SPEEK A THESIS STI^MITTEO FOB THB DEOBIX OF DOCTOB OS PHIIiOSOFHT THE UNIVKBSITY OF 'WISCO^SHT 1915 MADISON, WISCONSIN 1917 PRICE, 25 CENTS BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN Issued monthly by the University ol Wisconsin at Madison, Wisconsin. Entered as second-class matter July 11, 191fi, at the post ofSce at Madison, Wisconsin, under the Act of August 24, 1»12. The Bulletin of the University of Wisconsin is published bi-monthly at Madison. For postal purposes, all issues in all series of the Bulletin are included in one consecutive numbering as published, a numbering which has no relation whatever to the arrangement in series and vol- umes. The Economics and Political Science series, the History series, the Philology and Literature series, the Science series, the Engineering series, and the University Extension series contain original papers by persons connected with the University. The series formerly issued as the Economics, Political Science, and History series was discontinued with the completion of the second volume and has been replaced by the Economics and Political Science series and the History series. Persons who reside in the state of Wisconsin may obtain copies of the Bulletin free by applying to the Secretary of the Regents and pay- ing the cost of transportation. No. 1 of Vol. 1 of the Economics, Po- litical Science, and History series, Nos. 1 and 3 of Vol. 2 of the Phil- ology and Literature series. No. 2 of Vol. 2 of the Science series, and Nos. 1-5 of Vol. 1 and No. 4 of Vol. 2 of the Engineering series are now out of print and can no longer be furnished. Bulletins issued since May 1, 1898, are entered as second-class mail matter and no charge is required by the University to cover cost of postage. The postage required for such of the earlier numbers as can now be fur- nished is as follows: Econ. ser., Vol. 1, No. 2, 8c; No. 3, 13c; Vol. 3, No. 1, 4c; Phil, ser.. Vol. 1, No. 1, 5c; Sci. ser., Vol. 1, No. 1, 2c; No. 2, 2c; No. 3, 3c; No. 4, 3c; No. 5, 10c; Vol. 2, No. 1, 2c; Eng. ser., Vol. 1, No. 6, 2c; No. 7, 3c; No. 8, 2c; No. 9, 4c; No. 10. 3c; Vol. 2, No. 1, 4c; No. 2, 2c. Any number of the Bulletin now In print will be sent postpaid to persons not residents of Wisconsin from the office of the Secretary of the Regents on receipt of the price. Title pages and tables of contents to completed volumes of all series have been issued and will be fur- nished without cost on application to the University Librarian. Com- munications having reference to an exchange of publications should be addressed to the Librarian of The University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. BconomScs and Political Science Serlesi VOLUME I (Complete in three numbers, with title-page and table of contents.) No. 1. The decline of landowning farmers In England, by Henry Charles Taylor. 1904. 66 p. 25 cents. No. J. History of agriculture in Dane County, Wisconsin, by Benja^ min Horace Hlbbard. 1904. 148 p. 75 cents. No. 3. A history of the Northern Securities case, by Balthasar Henry Meyer. 1906. 136 p. 60 cents. VOLUME II (Complete in two numbers, with title-page and table of contents.) No. 1. The labor contract from individual to collective bargaining, by Margaret Anna Schaffner. 1907. 182 p. 50 cents. No. 2. The financial history of Wisconsin, by Raymond Vincent Phe- lan. 1908. 294 p. 50 cents. BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN NO. 878 Economics and Political Science Series, Vol. t>, No. a, pp. 247-428 THE SINGLETAX AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT PETER ALEXANDER SPEEK IV \ A THESIS SUBMITTED) FOE THE DE6BEE OF DOCTOR OF PHUiOSOPHT THE TTNIVEESITT OF WISCONSIN 1915 MADISON, WISCONSIN OCTOBER, 1917 CONTENTS PART ONE Chaptee Page I. Henry Geobge and the Singletax 9 Method 13 Metaphysics 14 Social Philosophy 14 Economic System 15 The Singletax 18 Criticism by Economists 20 Criticism by Socialists 22 Conclusion 23 II. The Central Labob Union of New York 24 Origin 24 Growth and Strength 25 Relations to other Organizations 28 Boycotting 30 Organizing New Unions 31 Eight Hours 31 Pblitical Action. Campaign in 1882 32 Labor Day •. . . 33 Discussing Politics 33 Conclusion 37 III. Othee L.ABOR Organizations 40 The Knights of Labor 40 The Greenbackers 42 The Socialists 46 IV. The "Grand Legal Round-ttp" of Strikers and Botcot- TEES 50 PAET TWO V. The Political Uprising of Organized Labor 62 Henry George Steps In 64 The Singletax Made the Issue 66 Characteristics of the Platform 69 Chickerlng Hall Meeting of the Outside Supporters 71 The Acceptance of the Nomination 71 [249] 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS VI. The Matobaltt Campaign by Oeganized Labob in 1886 73 Campaign Funds 73 Campaign Press, The Leader 73 Opposing Parties 76 Democratic Party 76 Republican Party 79 Irving Hall Democrats 80 Henry George Clubs and District Associations 81 Open Exchange of Letters between Henry George and Abram Hewitt 81 Democratic Meetings and Speeches 83 Conflict with the Authorities of the Catholic Church in New York 84 Labor Meetings and Speeches of Henry George 86 The Election and Voters 87 VII. Building tip the United Labob Pabty 90 Central Organizations 90 Local Organizations 92 Capture of the Leader by the Socialists 98 The Standard 100 The Development of the Conflict with the Authorities of the Catholic Church in New York 101 Anti-Poverty Society 103 The Conflict over the Term "Labor" in the Party's Name 104 Developments in the Central Organizations 105 Vin. The Open Sput in the Locals 109 Developments in the Assembly Districts 109 The Attitude of the Central Labor Union 115 The Attitude of the Labor Leaders 116 The Attitude of the Socialist Labor Party 117 The Attitude of the Leader 118 The Attitude of Henry George 119 Local Organizations in Other Counties '. . 119 IX. The STBAOtrsE Convention and the State Campaign or 1887 121 The Convention 121 The Progressive Labor Party 131 The State Campaign of 1887 138 X. Downfall of the United Labob Party 143 The Split Among the Singletaxers 143 The National Campaign of the United Labor Party 149 Henry George in the Presidential Campaign for the Democratic Party 150 The Results of the Campaign 154 Appendices 158 [ 250 ] INTRODUCTION To Americans it is instructive to have our political and eco- nomic movements studied and described for us by foreigners. It is equally instructive to have our radical and revolutionary move- ments described by one who has taken part in those movements abroad. We get not only an objective judgment on ourselves, but also a view of the way in which American institutions affect a foreign revolutionary. As a student in the Imperial University of Juriev, a teacher, then an investigator of rural conditions for the Zemstvo of the Government Pskof, then editor and proprietor of a social- istic paper preceding the revolution of 1905, Mr. Speek was forced to leave Russia after the suppression of his paper by the reactionary government that followed. In Denmark he organ- ized a cooperative society among the refugees, and started in New York, in 1909, a newspaper for the people of his own na- tionality, the Esthonians, which is still existing and developing. With this background of experience in revolutionary socialism, as well as in practical efforts to help his own people, he sets him- self to get an understanding of the most dramatic crisis that has occurred in this country between the two schools of radical labor philosophy, the German socialism of Karl Marx and the Amer- ican individualism of Henry George. The crisis is affected some- what by remnants of the American Greenbackism of Edward Kellogg. In substance Mr. Speek finds that the economic,^ political and social conditions of Europe produce certain theories and philoso- phies of reform which the immigrants, with their tmaccustomed civic liberties, try to realize in America. But the conditions here are different and they produce, accordingly, different theories and philosophies, such as the singletax and Greenbackism. As a [251] 6 INTRODUCTION result, sharp conflicts occur between the European and the Amer- ican theories. Yet the mass movements of labor originate and develop, not out of speculative theories or philosophies, but under the force of immediate and practical la,bor demands. This work shows, by analyzing both the philosophies and the demands, why it was that neither socialism nor the singletax, notwithstanding the fervent efforts of both schools, became the issue of the mass movement of labor in the decade of the eighties. Yet Mr. Speek holds that, even if philosophies and theories have but little weight for the direct and practical ends of the labor movement, they are nevertheless necessary and immeasurably, im- portant for the sake of education. The singletax and socialism stirred up the labor leaders, the reformers, and even the aca- demics. This great contest of the eighties has not hitherto been studied by our economic or political historians, and Mr. Speek, by cen- tering his attention on the Central Labor Union of New York, picks out the spot where the decisive battle was fought, and thereby fills a gap in the history of American labor. Incidentally, from a theoretical revolutionist he seems to have become a prac- tical reconstructionist. John E. Commons. [252] PREFACE The following pages are a piece of research work attempting an historical sketch of the singletax agitation in connection with the labor movement. The first part contains four chapters: (I) Analysis of the singletax theory ; its formation and relation to the economic con- ditions and to other current doctrines of the time; (II and III) Description of labor organizations in the light of the industrial and legal relatiolas; and (IV) Analysis of the conditions which directly brought organized labor into independent politics in 1886. The second part contains six chapters, which describe the char- acter and analyze the events and results of the singletax agitation in the labor movement. In the treatment of the various phases of the subject it has been the author's desire to preserve a strictly neutral point of view, especially in the consideration of conflicts between oppos- ing schools or factions and their leaders. The research has been conducted under the direction of Pro- fessor John E. Commons, while valuable suggestions have been received from Professor Kichard T. Ely, of the University of Wisconsin. Petee Alexander Speek. [253] PART ONE CHAPTER I HENRY GEORGE AND THe' SINGLETAX Henry George was bom on September 2, 1839, in Philadelphia, Pa. His father was of English-Welsh and his mother of English- Scotch blood, both descendants from middle-class stock, from whom Henry George inherited his restless ambitions and enter- prising, indi\ddualistie spirit. His schooling went no further than the first four years of the public schools. When fourteen years of age he went to work in a shop as an errand boy. Dreaming of adventures and fortune, he later made a sea voyage to Australia and India as foremast boy. After his return he started to learn typesetting. The fol- lowing year rumors of marvelous opportunities for fortune in California lured him westward. In the West he tried prospect- ing for gold and made repeated investments in mining, but always without success. To earn his living he was compelled to set type and finally to master this trade, which gave him, besides daily bread, an opportunity for mental development already stimulated in earlier days by his fondness for books. Several attempts in the newspaper business were without material suc- cess, although they were otherwise fortunate for him. Thinking, reading, gathering materials, writing for his papers, and always occupied in the discussion of public questions, he became an intelligent and powerful journalist. Although he was for many years a wage-earner he never con- sidered himself as belonging to the wage-earning class, of the existence of which as a feature of our industrial system he seemed unconscious. To be a wage-earner seemed to -him, and [255] 10 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN perhaps to the majority of the American wage-earners of that time, only a temporary necessity, a stepping stone toward an opportunity to start an independent enterprise which would lead to fortune. In a paper On the Profitable Employment of Time, which was one of his earliest literary attempts, he speaks of his "longing for wealth," in his eyes the "principal object of life."^ His failures in business and speculation were due to obvious causes ; he lacked both business ability and capital. His honesty did not allow him to use doubtful methods, and the frontier life in the West, with its free-for-all natural opportunities, was dis- appearing. The monopolizing power of great business corpora- tions had begun to make itself felt. Mining had so far advanced that it required special knowledge and costly appliances, repre- senting considerable capital. This had led in turn to the appro- priation of metal-bearing lands by powerful mining companies, so that few opportunities were left to individual prospectors for "washing out their wages." The same had happened in newspaper enterprises. In most cases these were at the mercy of the Associated Press and the telegraph companies. The great established papers in combina- tion with the news-gathering agencies seemed able to suppress competition. Henry George had two personal contests with these monopolies and was beaten in both. His continued failures in getting above the "poverty line" set him' thinking deeply about the economic life of society. While in New York in 1869 he was greatly impressed by the sight of its vast wealth side by side with the poverty and degradation of the masses. This observation led him to the pessimistic conclusion that the enormous increase in productive power had had no tendency to lighten the burdens of the toilers. But what was the cause of such an anomaly? The answer he found mainly in his observations of frontier life in the West, supplemented by reading economic and political literature. He had read John Stuart Mill 's Political Economy as early as 1868, but his conclusions were due in the main to his own observations and reflections. The transcontinental railway system had been completed in 1869. As a result of this the western cities expected > The Life of Henry George, New York, 1904, p. 156. [256] SPEEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT H to achieve rapid development of industries and great increase of population. This expectation provoked inordinate speculation in land. By capitalization of its expected future values, the price rose far above the value measured by the income from- the actual use of land. Henry George was greatly impressed by this phenomenon, the consideration of which led him finally to his ''great discovery", described by him as foUows: "Like a flash it came upon me that there was the reason for increasing poverty with advancing wealth. With the growth of population, lands grow in value, and the men who work it must pay more for the privilege. ' '^ Owing to the growth of monopoly and of industrial produc- tion on a large scale, the opportunities for wage-earners in min- ing, farming and manufacturing on a small scale were, in his opinion, greatly lessened. The overland railway brought from the East crowds of settlers seeking fortune. Cheap labor from the Orient continued to pour in. As a result of these conditions wages in the "West began to fall. After the opening of the rail- road, eastern capital flowed in abundantly, but was invested mainly in acquiring mineral and forest lands and other natural resources, rather than in productive enterprises which might have resulted in a greater demand for labor. This inflow of capital from the Bast brought down the rate of interest. Henry George ascribed the decline in wages and the fall in the interest rate solely to the rise of land values, and he came to the conclu- sion that rent rises at the expense of wages and interest. The results of the industrial depression of 1877 in the West tended to confirm this conclusion : rent continued to rise while wages and interest were falling. Thus the singletax theory of Henry George had its inception in his own observations and reflections on the frontier life of the West. Once the theory was created he applied it to the East, to the whole world, and for all time. In 1871 Henry George published a booklet entitled Our Land and Land Policy in which he first formulated his scheme of re- form, viz. : All taxes should be laid exclusively on the value of land irrespective of improvements. As the booklet did not at- 'Ihid., p. 210. [ 257 ] 12 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN tract any considerable attention and was soon forgotten, Henry George perceived that a more elaborate work was necessary and decided to bring it forth. This work, entitled Progress and Pov- erty, was begun in the latter part of 1877 and finished in 1879. After this book he wrote a series of works, of which The Science of Political Economy was the most noteworthy. His Progress and Poverty proved to be, in its success in attracting attention, one of the greatest works of modern social reform and political economy. It has been issued in millions of copies in all important languages of the world. This success, unexpected even to the author himself, is to be explained by several causes: the work appeared at a time when social problems and land reforms were widely agitated; the honest and sincere treatment of the subject, the striking criticism of existing economic conditions and rela- tions, the novel, self-assured and bold conclusions, the popular language and the artistic, fascinating style, all made for its suc- cess. Count Tolstoi,^ whose taste as a literary artist cannot be ques- tioned, expressed himself on the style of Progress and Poverty as follows: "How I admire his (Henry George's) speech, which is so Christian; his sj;yle, which is so clear; and his metaphors, which are so striking."* Karl Marx, reading Progress and Pov- erty, also found that Henry George was a writer of talent.^ Progress and Poverty really reads like a poem, especially its introductory chapter and the chapters on the effects of the rem- edy. In the latter he had unreservedly permitted his rich imag- ination to soar. "Let Imagination fill out the picture; its colors grow too bright for words to paint."* But, nevertheless, his master hand painted a most beautiful, harmonious and happy society which, according to his sincere expectation, would result from the adoption of the singletax. In writing Progress amd Poverty he was at the height of his literary powers. This work ' It is worthy of note that Tolstoi, as a, religious Anarchist opposing the state and all kinds of taxes, accepted the Indictment of the existing order hy Henry Georse, but instead of the singletajc Tolstoi advocated land com- munalizati-on. • The Standard, Dec. 15, 1888, p. 1. ' Brief e und Avsziige nits Brief en von Jch. Phil. Becker, etc. Stuttgart, 1906, p. 177. * Progress oMd Poverty, 25th Anniversary Edition, New Tork, p. 469. [258] SPBBK — SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 13 overshadows all his other writings, in which he either repeats or explains more fully the ideas set forth in it. Henry George's public activities consisted mainly in agitation for the singletax. He made several successful speaking tours ,in England and one in Australia, "but the most important of his agitations was carried on by him in his native America. Here he reached his greatest success when he led organized labor in its political campaign in New York City in 1886, defeating the Ee- publiean party headed by Theodore Roosevelt, and losing by a small margin to Abram S. Hewitt, the Democratic candidate. In the middle of 1880 he moved from the "West to the city of New York and made his permanent home there, earning his living by writing and speaking, and by his connection with a publishing house. He died in New York on October 29, 1897, in the midst of a municipal campaign in which he was again candidate for mayor, and was celebrated at his death as one of the greatest re- formers of the 19th century. Method Henry George's reasoning was dogmatic and his method deduc- tive. He speaks in the preface to the fourth edition of Progress and Poverty as though he had proved his conclusions by indue- 1;ion, but it appears that he simply meant under this term exam- plifications or "citing of facts of common knowledge." When his friend Dr. Taylor of San Francisco suggested that he use the inductive method in writing Protection and Free Trade, he re- jected the suggestion and expressed his preference for deduction, saying: "What the people want is theory, and until they get a correct theory into their heads, all citing of facts is useless.'" First theory, consisting mainly of bare statements, then facts to fit the theory — ^f acts not in their causal connections nor as an historical analysis, but facts merely in the sense of illustrations; this was the method employed by the economists of the classical school, especially Ricardo, and this was the method which Henry George used. '•The Life of Henry George, New York, 1904, p. 448. [259] 14 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN Metaphysics Henry George 's general philosophy was based upon a teleologi- cal conception that the first or all-beginning cause is Spirit or God — ^the creator of the world of which the all-embracing system or order is personified as Nature.^ Invariable relations of things are the "laws of nature." Being based on the will of God, they are everywhere and in all times the same — unchangeable and eternal.^ Just what Henry George meaiit by the term "natural laws" he tried to demonstrate by several illustrations from purely physical and biological phenomena — gravitation, magnetism, the appearance of the chick from an egg, the appearance of teeth at a certain period of infancy, and the like.^" But "human laws are made by man and share all his weakness and frailties. They must be enforced by penalties called sanctions. ' '^^ The real object of science, according to Henry George, is to discover the laws of nature. Likewise the science of political economy seeks in natural law the causes of the phenomena which it investigates. "With human law, except as furnishing illustra- tions and supplying subjects for its investigations, it (the science of political economy) has nothing whatever to do. It is con- cerned with the permanent, not with the transient, with the laws of nature, not with the laws of man. ' '^^ Thus the metaphysical conceptions of Henry George were those of a teleologist and physicist. Social Philosophy Henry George's social philosophy was industrial individualism. He advocated free, unrestricted, and unregulated competition and noninterference of the state — Imssez faire policy. Produc- tion, distribution, property rights (except property right to land) and competition were, to him, based upon natural laws, both physical and moral, interference with which was not only "Henry George, The Science of Political Economy, New York, 1898, p. 54. 'Ibid., p. 59. ^'Ibid., pp. 55 and 56. " Ibid., p. 60. "/6id., p. 64. r 260 1 SPEBK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 15 useless and harmful, but even impossible in the long run. Speak- ing of state interference, he believed it to be " evident that what- ever savors of regulation and restriction is in itself bad. ' '^^ He opposed government as a "directing and repressing power, "^* and favored a government as an "administration of a great co- operative society ... in which all the coarse passions are held iu check, not by force, not by law, but by common opinion and the mutual desire of pleasing. ' '^' This shows that the social philosophy of Henry George was tending toward the group of anarchistic philosophies. The chief factors in its formation were American conditions, especially the western frontier at that time, and the influence of the economists of the classical school. Henry George, criticising Socialism, stated that Anarchism was "much better suited than Socialism to the American genius."^' As Henry George recognized state and laws, though only in a mild and simplified forpi, and taxes, though only in the sense of a tax on land values, and opposed anarchistic tactics, on the whole he cannot be classified with the anarchists proper, but only as having in his social philosophy tendencies toward Anarchism. Economic System Henry George's economic system was, in the main, nearest to that of the radical .wing of the Eicardian School. The current political economy explained poverty by the Malthusian doctrine of population and the wages-fund theory, both of which doctrines Henry George rejected ; the former on the ground that the larger the population the stronger and more efficient its productive power, the latter for the reason that "wages are not drawn from capital but produced by labor. "^' He himself sought to explain poverty solely by the private ap- propriation of the economic rent of land, which, according to the Eicardian theory, accepted by Henry George, consisted in a sur- plus of the better grades of land over the poorest grades in use. "Progress and Poverty, 25th Anniversary Edition, Now York, p. 317. "Ibid., p. 457. ''Ibid., p. 563. »' The Standard, Nov. 19, 1887, p. 1. "Progress and Poverty, 25th Anniversary Edition, New York, p. 49. [261] 16 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN Economic rent was to him unearned increment, which with the advancement of civilization and the growth of population always rises at the expense of wages and interest, these two latter, being in harmony with each other, fall together as land rents rise or rise together as land rents fall. But as the populatidn is always growing and material production always advancing in a pro- gressive state of society, economic rent, which indicates the ground values of land, has a tendency toward constant rise, and wages and interest have a constant tendency to fall. "Rent swallows up the whole gain and pauperism accompanies prog- ress"^' was his conclusion in explanation of poverty. Thus the foundation of his economic system was land, by which be meant "not only the surface of earth, . . . but the whole material universe ouside of man himself ... all nat- ural materials, forces and opportunities."^* In the explanation of the law of wages he seemed to anticipate the theory that wages are determined by the product of marginal labor.^" According to Henry George, wages are determined by the "lowest point at which production continues . . . and wages will rise or fall as this point rises or falls, "^^ and "the rate of wages in one occupation is always dependent on the rate in another . . . until the lowest and widest stratum is reached. ' '" In the demonstration of his reasonings on wages he always goes to the marginal or non-rent land. In the term labor he included all human exertion, physical and mental, and all human powers, natural and acquired. Interest on capital he justified by the fact that some forms of capital, like plants and animals, have the power to increase by themselves, and that this "average power of increase which at- taches to capital from its use in reproductive modes""* deter- mines the relation between wages and interest. ^'liid., p. 222. " Ibid., p. 37. "»J. B. Clark, The Distribution of Wealth, New York, 1908, p. 106. ^Progress and Poverty, 25th Anniversary Edition, p. 203. ''Ibid., p. 210. ''Ibid., p. 202. [262] SPEEK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 17 To him capital was only- that part of material wealth which was devoted to the aid of production, and he was inclined to treat interest as a Mnd of wages. The distribution of wealth was to him dual, rather dual than tripartite. ' ' Capital is but a form of labor, and its distinction from labor is in reality but a subdivi- sion, just as division of labor into skilled and unskilled would be."^* The real distribution of wealth was, therefore, between the two possessors of the two factors of production, the land- owners (rents) and the producers (wages). He came to the same conclusions in his treatment of pure prof- its, one category of which comprises monopoly gains, which, in turn, a,re due to private ownership of land ; another, called wages of superintendence, belongs to the category of wages proper and ought to be considered as such ; and the third, due to the elements of risk, was profit obtained by stock jobbing, speculation, and all sorts of gambling. A monopoly price was to him a tax levied upon the consuming public by private persons. The power to make such private as- sessment of consumers was due to grants by the government, and to the aggregation of capital in business, the possibility of which he attributed for the most, part to "a maladjustment of forces in the legislative department of government. "^° Public utility business in which free competition is not possible ought to belong to the functions of the state.^" But he considered all monopolies trivial as compared with monopoly of land^^ — ^the real mother of all monopolies, and the cause of industrial depressions, and other socio-economic evils. This, in outline, is Henry George's economic system, from which he deduced all his reform doctrines. "Progress and Poverty, 25th Anniversary Edition, p. 203. ''Ibid., p. 193. » Ibid., p. 410. " Ibid. [263] 18 bulletin op the university of wisconsin The Singletax The most important and original contribution of Henry George^* is his plan of reform known as the singletax,^' a sum- mary of which follows : Everything in the mechanism of the economic life of society is in perfect natural order except one wheel, which is defective — the private appropriation of land rent. Against this Henry George concentrated his furious attacks, because it was to him the root of all the ills in socio-economic life, low wages, low rates of inter- -est, industrial depressions, monopolies — in short, the basic cause of poverty. His main arguments were : (a) land, as such, was created by God and given free to all men, consequently land, being nobody's property {res nullius), ought not to be privately appropriated; (b) land in itself has no value, and the value attributed to it, being due to the growth of the community, con- sequently belongs to the community. The problem of returning the land value to its rightful owner he would solve by confisca- tion not of the land itself but simply of its economic rents, by means of a tax levied upon the values of land to the full extent of its economic rent, while all other taxes ought to be abolished on the ground that they were an unjust fine or punishment upon the exertions and products of labor. In criticism of existing taxes he went even so far as to state that "customs taxes, and improvement taxes, and income taxes, and taxes on business and ^Although many writers on economic subjects before Henry George had advocated a, singletax, and sometimes a special tax on land values in dif- ferent degrees and for various reasons, for example, John Locke, Some Con- siderations of the Consequences of Lowering the Interests and Raising the Value of Money, 1691 ; Marshal de Vanban, Project d'une dixme royale, 1707 ; Jacob Vanderlint, Money answers all things, 1734 ; Turgot, Riflections sur la formation et la distribution des richesses, 1766 ; Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, 1768 and John Stuart Mill, Political Economy, 1848, still none of his predecessors had made the singletax so imperative with such high claims for its consequences. The emphasis given to this theory by Henry George and the methods by which he arrived at his results make his originality un- questionable. " The term singletax was first used by Henry George In his Progress and Poverty (Book VIII, ch. IV) but Its general use began In 1887 by the sug- gestion made by Thomas G. Shearman. George himself was never satis- fied with this term, on the ground that It designated rather his method than his philosophy. (.The Life of Henry George, p. 496.) In this mono- graph the term singletax is, however, used both for the specific plan of re- form and for Its underlying philosophy. [264] SPBEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 19 occupations and on legacies and successions, are morally and economically no better than highway robbery and burglary, all the more disastrous and demoralizing because practiced by the state. "=» He defended the interests of producers — ^wage-earners, manu- facturers, transporters, merchants and bankers. All these were to him in the same harmonious category of labor. If between them there existed some grievances, these were not radical and were primarily due to the unnatural private ownership in land, land speculation and land monopolies. The labor question was to / bim the land question. No other remedy than the singletax, / according to him, would solve the problem of poverty. While — greater economy in government would simplify it and put it under more direct control of the people, such reform could not cure existing poverty.^^ Education would be efficient only when the people were relieved from want.^^ Labor unions could advance wages only temporarily and only at the expense of land rents. So the contest is not between labor T and capital, but between laborers and land owners. As the lat- i-— ter are stronger than the former, labor unions cannot make any permanent gains in the struggle. Moreover, the labor unions in their methods are necessarily destructive and tyrannical, destroy- ing individual freedom through organized discipline and wealth through strikes. "These combinations (labor unions) are, there- fore, necessarily destructive of the very things which workmen seek to gain through them — ^wealth and freedom. "^^ Nor could cooperation afford relief even if it were universal; "It could not raise wages nor relieve poverty. This is readily seen."^^ Equally futile would be governmental interference, of which the most thorough-going form was to him socialistic. ' ' We have passed out of the socialism of the tribal state and cannot re- enter it again except by retrogression"'* . . . "AU that is ''A Perplexed Philosopher, New York, 1904, p. 243. ^Ibid., p. 301. 'Ubid., p. 314. "Ibid. "Ibid., p. 318. [265] 20 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN necessary to social regeneration is included in the motto of those Russian patriots called Nihilists,^^ 'Land and Liberty!' '"" Only the transfer of land values to the public would solve the problem of poverty; but how? Not by a mere redistribution of land, not by equal partitions of land, not by land communaliza- tion, municipalization or nationalization — ^to all these Henry George objected, because they would require more governmental interference at the expense of individual freedom — but by the singletax, i. e., by gradual transfer of all taxes to the value of land, exclusive of improvements. The operation of the singletax would, according to him, result in higher wages and profits ; in abolition of the concentration of wealth; in cheeking the withholding of land from use by land- owners and speculators ; in encouragement of improvements and industries; in emancipation from industrial depressions; in the solution of the currency problem; in simplification of govern- ment and laws ; in individual freedom ; in development of sciences and arts ; in a word, in justice, progress and happiness such as humanity had never yet experienced.^^ Ceiticism by Economists As Henry George made his main deductions from premises and postulates like those of the Physiocrats^' and of the Classical School, all criticisms made by the economists at that time against these two schools were turned also against him. These criticisms were made against his method, his natural rights and natural laws, his individualism and laissez faire policy, his labor theory of value, and the absolutism of his conclusions. At first the economists did not recognize Henry George as an economist at all. Alfred Marshall thought that there was nothing new or true in Progress and Poverty, and that Henry George had not understood a single author whom he had undertaken to criticize. Marshall refrained from censuring him, however, as he ""Russian radical-rationalists in the sixties. "A. Perplexed Philosopher, New York, 1904, p. 319. " Progress and Poverty, Book IX, ch. I-IV. " Benedict "Frledlaender (Die vier Hauptrichtungen der modernen soxialen Bewegung, Berlin, 1901) calls Henry George a Neophyslocrat, and his spe- clflc 'singrletax theory a kind of speculative scheme — "Schematismus". [266] SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 21 considered this lack of understanding to be due to lack of special training.*' One of the earliest critics of Henry George among the Amer- ican economists was Professor Eichard T. Ely, who published a series of articles entitled "Land, Labor and Taxation" in the Independent in 1887. He pointed out the difficulties of the realization of this theory, its injustice from an ethical standpoint, and that the expected results of such reform were exaggerated by Henry George. This criticism was recognized by the latter as fair, though he disagreed with it." AU criticism by economists Henry George met with counter- criticism; he called economists Scholastieists, saw in many of them a mild kind of Socialists, and attacked their "confusion of terms and ideas." At a meeting of the American Social Science Association on September 5, 1890, the singletax theory was attacked on different points by several economists; especially by Professor Edwin K. A. Seligman, who believed that the singletax would not lower rent in the cities but would only transfer rent to the govern- ment. In answer, Henry George, turning to the professors of political economy, said: "You men of light and leading ... if our remedy (the single- tax) will not do', what is your remedy? It will not do to propose little goody-goody palliatives, that hurt no one, help no one, and go nowhere . . . You must choose between the singletax or so- cialism." He then warned the professors against the danger of the latter, which would bring more interference and more "bars to the liberty of citizens."*" At present the importance of Henry George is recognized by economists. The singletax has become more proniinent in the discussion of land reform. There is hardly a standard textbook of political economy for college studies in which the singletax the- ory of Henry George is not treated in one way or another. J. B. Clark, in the preface of his Distribution of Wealth, p. viii, acknowledges his indebtedness to Henry George, L. H. Haney, in his History of Economic Thought, p. 516, states that "The Life of Henry George, New Tork, 1904, pp. 435 and 436. *" Journal of Social Science, October, 1890. [267] 22 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN Henry George's Progress and Poverty "aroused an interest and provoked such debate that we of a later generation still hear its echoes, while hardly realizing its intensity. ' ' Professor William A. Scott, in an article on Henry George, New World, March, 1898, pp. 87-102, criticizing the deductive reasoning of Henry George, his extreme pessimism in regard to economic tendencies, and his economic system, admits in his introductory' remarks that Henry George was a "strong and inspiring personality and a great power in the civilization of our day. ' ' Criticism by Socialists As the materialistic interpretation of history, industrial col- lectivism, the abolition of the wage-system — ^that is, a complete transformation of existing economic order and the class struggle tactics — as all these doctrines of the Socialists were diametrically opposed to those of Henry George, the main battle was fought between him and the Socialists, both sides having been, almost to the same extent, self-assured and bold in their reasonings and conclusions. In this conflict the sharpest clash occurred on the question of the relation between labor and capital. The Socialists claimed that the economic interests of the wage-earners and those of the capitalists were antagonistic. This claim was denied by Henry George, who held that such conflict of interests exists only between land owners and producers, including in the latter term both laborers and capitalists. Karl Marx, criticising Progress and Poverty, found Henry George theoretically entirely behind the times — "total arri^re",*^ — ignorant of the nature of ' ' surplus value ' ', and belonging to a class of those "bourgeois economists" who would allow the wage- system and capitalist production to remain, under the delusion that, if the ground rents through taxes should be taken into the treasury of the state, all the faults of capitalistic production would disappear.*^ Friedrich Engels criticized Henry George in the same way, pointing out that "what the Socialists demand implies a total "■ Brief e und Auszuge aus Brief en von Joh. Phil. Becker, etc. Stuttgart, 1906, pp. 176, 177. [268] SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 23 revolution of the whole system of social production ; what Henry George demands leaves the present mode of social production un- touched."*' Henry George attacked socialism along all lines for not having a religious basis, for confusion of land with capital, for not un- derstanding the term labor, for revolutionary tactics, for array- ing class against class, for the destruction of individual freedom — ^making the people the slaves of the state, and so forth. As he was opposed to anything which savored of interference (except the confiscation of the economic rent of land) he saw socialism in such movements as charity,** prohibition, protection*^ and the like. Conclusion Prom an objective standpoint hardly anything can be said either for or against Henry George's metaphysical view's, because they were a matter of his ultimate belief or religion. His doc- trine of industrial individualism as a basic point in his social philosophy is suffering under the recent tendencies of our in- dustrial life. The interference of public authority — governmen- tal control and regulation — is developing both extensively and intensively. The differentiation of industrial classes and groups, all of which he included in the same category of harmonious pro- ducers or laborers, has become an obvious and generally recog- nized fact in our time. It is, however, somewhat early to draw a final conclusion con- cerning his specific scheme of reform, — ^the singletax. Although there is no one spot on earth where the singletax is realized to the extent proposed by its author and which would justify the term singletax, still the theory itself is gaining in popularity as an ingenious plan to encourage the improvement of land and to check the withholding of land from use. There is a marked tendency, especially in the cities, to tax imimproved land higher than improved. "Friedrich Engels, The Condition of the Working Classes in Englani,, 1884, Preface. " The Life of Henry George, p. 568. « Tfte Standard, Jan. 14, 1888, p. 5. [269] 24 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN CHAPTBE II THE CENTRAL LABOE UNION OF NEW YORK Origin On December 15, 1881, a number of worMngmen met in Science , Hall, New York, in response to a call issued by Robert Blissert, a journeyman tailor and a member of the Excelsior Labor Club, a Socialist local assembly of tbe Knights of Labor, and resolved to caU a mass meeting of the worMngmen of New York, at the Cooper Institute, on January 30, 1882, for the purpose of sending greetings and encouragement to the tenants and Workingmen of Ireland in their struggle against the English feudal landlordism.^ On the appointed date one trade union after another "marched up to the haU, most of them preceded by a band. The result was a stirring manifesto addressed to the workingmen of all coun- tries,"^ to encourage the suffering and., struggling Irish people. The manifesto was signed by Matthew Ma^je, a^_Sodaljst. At the same meeting Charles L. Miller proposed a resolution that all delegates of trade and labor unions then present, report to their respective organizations and lay before them the question whether they were in favor of forming a United Labor Organiza- tion. This resolution was adopted and the date for the next meeting fixed, February 11, 1882.^ On this date, at the same meeting place, fourteen unions re- ported through their delegates that they favored a permanent United Organization of Labor Unions. After an address deliv- ered by Philip Van Patten, national secretary of the Socialist Labor party, the formation of the Central Labor Union was unanimously agreed upon. 'John Stcinton's Paper, Feb. 28, 1886, p. 1. [270] SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 25 The platform was drawn up in a strongly socialistic spirit, tinged somewhat by the ideas of the Greenback currency reform- ers. The preamble set forth the need for "concentrating the working classes for their own natural protection, education, and social advancement. ' '^ The Declaration of Principles emphasized the inevitableness of the class struggle between capital and la- bor. It reiterated the maxim of the old International: "The emancipation of the working classes must be achieved by the working classes themselves."^ It was also explicit in regard to the necessity of political action. The Declaration was followed by a list of legislative demands dealing with the protection of labor. A much broader task of the new organization was outlined in its "Object." This included aid to the constituent trade and labor organizations in extending their membership as well as in organizing new unions, in the dispensation of strike benefits, in the arbitration of disputes with employers, and in the support of the labor press. There was finally a provision for the coUeeting of labor statistics — a need which, in the absence of both state and federal bureaus, the workingmen felt keenly. The principles expressed in this platform remained unchanged until the end of the eighties, while the methods of organization were gradually improved as we shall see presently. Growth and Strength The structure of the Central Labor Union from its beginning until 1885 was simple. It' had no president. A chairman was elected at each meeting. This was done in order "that no man should have the power as president to sell out the union to any political party. "^ The central body consisted of five delegates from each bona fide trade and labor union, but no trade could be doubly represented, that is, through both its central body and its local branch. As a further precaution against politicians it was provided that no person could be a delegate who had not been a ' The Constitution of the Central Labor Union of New York, edition of 1887, New York. " ' Testimony of P. I. McGuire before the Senate Committee, Aug. 29, 1883. Report of the Committee of the Senate upon the relations between Labor and Capital, 1885, p. 809. [271] 26 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVteRSITT OF WISCONSIN member of his respective trade organization for at least six months previous to his election. No public official, professional politician, lawyer, or anyone who was not a wage-earner, was eligible as a delegate.* (By the middle of 1884 the number of affiliated unions had grown to 36.' In July, 1886, it embraced 120 unionZ?! >, P. I. McGuire testified August 29, 1883, that the Central Labor Union of New York had a membership of 70,000 in the three cities of New York, Brooklyn, and Jersey City. This included organizations of men who were without trades, unskilled laborers as well as clerks and workmen in occupations where there were not enough men to form a regular union. These organizations were called amalgamated labor associations.^ Early in 1886 the membership of the Central Labor Union had grown so large and had so much additional business, in the form of committees, reports, communications, debates, resolutions, vot- ing and so forth, that Sunday afternoon meetings could no longer cope with it efficiently and rapidly. Thus the Central Labor Union was confronted by the necessity for reorganization. The Committee on Constitution worked out a plan which was adopted by an almost unanimous vote of the delegates present. This plan was submitted for endorsement to the unions repre- sented before it became a law. It provided for trade sections where four or more unions be- longed to the same trade, and for a miscellaneous section to in- clude the remaining organizations. Many of the functions which had hitherto been exercised by the Central Labor Union, such as arbitration of disputes with employers, the giving of strike aid, and the instituting of boycotts were entrusted to one or another of these sections as a first resort. To the jurisdiction of the Central Labor Union were left functions requiring the concerted action of all the bodies affiliated therewith.' At the appointed meeting in July, 1886, for the receiving of * Section 3 of the Constitution. 'John Swinton's Paper, July 13, 1884, p. 2. 'John Swinton's Paper, July 4, 1886, p. 4. ^Report of the Committee of the Senate upon the Relations between La- bor and Capital, 1885, pp. 808 and 809. 'John Swinton's Paper, Feb. 28, 1886, p. 1. [272] SPEBK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 27 referendum votes on a new constitution, 92 unions reported in favor, 4 against, and 14 protested because the delegates had not been instructed, while the delegates of a number of unions were absent. The chairman ruled that the new Constitution thus went into effect. An appeal against the ruling of the chair was voted down. The secretary was instructed to assort the trades and place them in their proper sections. At the next meeting the reorganization was completed and the grouping of the unions was ratified. The names and numbers of the various trades sections were as follows : No. 1: Building Trades 39 unions 2. Tobacco " 9 3. Textile " 8 4. . Clothing " 16 " 5. Printing " 13 6. Pood Products, etc 16 7. Clerks, etc. 6 " 8. Iron and Metal 18 9. Furniture Trade 14 10. Miscellaneous 68 " Altogether there were ten sections and 207 unions in the city of New York and its vicinity. Each union had the right to send five delegates to its Trades Section Council and one to the Central Labor Union. In September, 1886, the number of unions affili- ated had fallen to 142. (^till the total membership was large, tsq- resenting, according to a report in TJie Sun, over 40,000 voters/ The exact membership is exceedingly hard to establish, because the number of the union members was constantly fluctuating. George Block, secretary of the Executive Committee in 1886, tes- ' tified November 2, 1887, before Mr. Stetson, a referee, that "there were about 60,000 men in the labor unions that ran Mr. George for Mayor" in 1886.^" This number evidently includes members of unions which were not under the direct control of the Central Labor Union. Adding to the 40,000 voters estimated by The Sun the members who were not naturalized citizens but who never- » The Sun, September 19, 1886, p. 3. M The Leader, Nov. 3, 1887, p. 1. [ 273 ] 28 BULiLBTIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN theless took part in the economic struggle, it is perhaps safe to say that the membership of the unions affiliated with the Central Labor Union was, in the fall of 1886, about 50,000,— quite an. imposing array of organized labor in the industrial center of New York at that time. In July, 1886, the Central Labor Union decided to form a Na- tional Central Labor Union. A committee was appointed to cor- respond with all the Central Labor Unions which, following the example of the Central Labor Union in New York, had been or- ganized during previous years in the great industrial centers of the Bast,^Brooklyn, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Baltimore,' Buf- falo, Boston and other cities. They were all similar to the Cen- tral Labor Union of New York. But this plan to unite them into a National Central Labor Union was abandoned because the at- tention of the leading Central Labor Union of New York was soon totally absorbed by the political campaign. The delegates met every Sunday afternoon, and the meet- ings usually continued three or four hours. If, after the regular business, there was any time left, it was used for debates upon general subjects which very often became political discussions. The Central Labor Union was very often called the ' ' Parliament of Organized Labor" by the newspaper reporters, and after-' wards, at the end of 1885, when the Union had grown much larger, its meetings were called the ' ' Sessions of the Central Labor Congress. ' '^^ Relations to Other Organizations The relations of the Central Labor Union to the non-labor or- ganizations, economic or political, were those of complete aloof- ness. This can be seen not only in the ' ' Objects of the Central Labor Union", but in aU its practical steps and actions. But its relations to the labor organizations were characterized by friendly cooperation. Labor, its defense, and the struggle for the betterment of its conditions, — ^these were the main issues. The Central Labor Union tolerated all social philosophies and dis- cussed them, but as a body it gave no preference to one over an- M/oTiji Swmton's Paper, Oct 18, 1885, p. 4, col. 1. [274] SPEEK — SINGLETAX AJ^D LABOR MOVEMENT 29 other. The same tolerant relations existed toward the Green- backers, and toward all organizations which advocated, with their specific philosophies, practical labor demands. There occurred, quite often, conflicts between unions them- selves, especially in the same trade. The Central Labor Union tried by all possible means to settle such conflicts. When a trade was represented by two distinct and antagonistic organiza- tions, and a difficulty existed between them and their employers, the Central Labor Union refused to assist either of them unless they harmonized their differences. For the purpose of settling such difficulties the Union organized a Committee on Grievances, which examined and investigated all complaints and grievances among the unions represented. Such committee presented the results of investigation to the central body or prospective sec- tion, which then endeavored to settle the conflict. The difficulty of harmonizing the interests of separate unions, speaking differ- ent languages and with different methods of thought, was evi- denced in many cases. In case of labor disputes between employers and employees the delegates reported the matter to the Section Committee on Arbitration, and if arbitration failed it was submitted to the Central Labor Union, which had the power to sanction a strike. When a strike took place, the Union called on all trade and labor organizations represented to assist the one in difficulty. The first important assistance by the Central Labor Union in the case of a strike was the raising of money for the support of the freight handlers, when they were on theij? celebrated general strike, in 1882, against the railroads centering in New York. The delegates were enthusiastic in their work, and the occasion gave opportunities to test their energy. Lectures were arranged for, and Benjamin ■ Butler, Eobert IngersoU and Felix Adler ad- dressed large meetings. Harry Miner and others gave the use of their theaters and haUs. By the efforts of the Central Labor Union $60,000 was raised for the strikers, but the great strike nevertheless was unsuccessful. Besides this support, many thousands of doUars were con- tributed by the Central Labor Union for local trades in trouble, as well as for others outside the city of New Tork and its vicinity. Over $5,000 was collected and forwarded through the Central [275] 30 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN Labor Union to Blocking Valley during the miners' troubles in 1884 and 1885, and about $3,000 was subscribed for the silk weav- ers who were on a strike against their employer, John N. Stearn. The shirt makers, ironers, and a score of other trades were mate- rially assisted in their struggles by the Central Labor Union. Boycotting The boycott as a means of coercion in labor struggles against employers was popularized by the Central Labor Union, and was adopted by other local and central labor bodies. If a strike failed or continued so long that it became unbearable for the strikers, then the latter usually appealed to the Central Labor Union, which, together with the strikers, decided to declare a boycott upon the affected employer. To this end the Central Labor Union advertised the boycott as widely as possible and spent for such advertisement considerable sums of money. When the em- ployer expressed willingness to resume negotiations, the Central Labor Union usually took the lead. The first boycott indorsed by the Central Labor Union was against Hastings and Company, of Philadelphia, gold beaters, be- cause this company discharged members of the workingmen's union. This was in April, 1882. The boycott as a weapon of retaliation, however, was not generally adopted until Typograph- ical Union No". 6, in January, 1884, instituted wholesale boycott- ing proceedings against the Tribune. After that, boycotting was very successful, especially in the city of New York. In February, 1886, the Central Labor Union had on its books resolutions indorsing the boycott of the Brooklyn Watch-Cane Company, Brennan & White's Shoes, Abendroth & Root's Mold- ings, Adam Brodt's Hats, Puller & Warren's Stoves, the Fifth Avenue Hotel, People's Line of steamboats to Albany, and Ste- phen Rogers, the employer of cheap painters, as well as the New York Lumber and Wood- Working Company. The boycott of these concerns was undertaken for discharging union men. At a meeting on February 21, 1886, the Central Labor Union re- solved to boycott a silk manufacturer of Holyoke, Mass., on ac- count of his alleged inhuman conduct toward his employes. Only a few cases of boycott conducted by the Central Labor Union are [276] SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 3X here quoted in order to show the strength of the latter and the nature and purpose of boycotting. The actual number of cases was much larger. One may find in the labor newspapers of that time a large number of advertisements of boycotts published by the Central Labor Union. As mentioned above, the popularization, in the early eighties, of the boycott against employers in America was mainly due to the Central Labor Union of New York. Before that time the boy- cott was occasionally practiced in the West and the Middle West, but not under the name of boycott. The Central Labor Union had even created a special Boycott Committee which conducted, in conjunction with the affected unions, all authorized boycotts. Organizing New Unions The Constitution, article VIII, section 4, provided that : "The Committee on Organization shall encourage anfi assist the formation of new unions, and visit, or cause to be visited, the various unions herein represented whenever required." In this work the Central Labor Union was quite an important instrument. About thirteen trades were organized under the guidance and with the support of the Union from its beginning until July, 1884, which "have now strong organizations, while all, have been greatly strengthened. The Central Labor Union was instrumental in organizing the Executive Council of the Building Trades and still watches over it. "" The Central Labor Union was mainly instrumental also in organizing the brewery workmen, and at the end of 1885 there was not a brewery in the city of New York which was not more or less well organized. Through 'affiliation with the Central Labor Union, the German and English bakers were organized and their hours of labor were reduced. Eight Hours In the middle of the eighties, the eight hour movement again sprang into prominence, growing directly out of the unemploy- ment due to the depressed industrial conditions. Mainly as a "John Swinton's Paper, May 2, 1886, p. 2. [277] 32 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN result of the endeavors of the Central Labor Union and of other labor organizations, an Eight Hour Bill was brought before the legislature of the state of New York, and to support this bill the Central Labor Union organized and conducted a large street demonstration (Eight Hour Parade) on April 14, 1884, Two years later, in 1886, when the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions started a nation-wide eight hour cam-, paign, the Central Labor Union called an Eight Hour Meeting on April 12, where a resolution called the Eight Hour Platform was unanimously passed. The eight hour day was said to be necessary because by that means "a large number of unemployed workmen, who were made super- fluous by all machinery being in the hands of private individuals, will again find employment, and all other workers will be enaT?led to take more rest, to educate themselves, and gain the necessary strength and enlightenment for the great struggle to come."" The strikes and boycotts .undertaken for the shortening of the hours of labor were supported and vigorously prosecuted by the Central Labor Union. In several cases — for example, in cigar making, cabinet making, and other trades — ^they succeeded in shortening the hours of labor. On the whole, however, the move- ment ended in failure, due in part to the riots in Haymarket Square, Chicago. This failure in the economic field was one of the causes which drove the Central Labor Union into the political campaign in the fall of 1886. Political Action — Campaign in 1882 In the second half of 1882 the effects of industrial depression were again felt by the workingmen; also, the rigid enforcement of the conspiracy laws aided in making trade union action more or less unsuccessful. Several long strikes, among them the freight-handlers', ended in failure. The comparative prosperity which followed the great depres- sion of 1873-1878 had given the workingmen an opportunity somewhat to reestablish their economic organizations and to make a successful effort to better their conditions. The majority of » Ibid. [278] SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 33 ' strikes at that time were won by the workers. Thereupon the employers turned to the legislatures and to the courts for pro- tection against the labor organizations. This change of front by the employers led the organized workingmen to political action in 1882, but there were fewer than 10,000 votes cast for their candidates in the election in November of that year, a showing which was poor indeed. Labor Day In 1882 the Central Labor Union at a "non-rent" mass meet- ing^* introduced the idea of the now universal Labor Day. The first Monday in September was fijxed upon for an annual holiday for the workers, and P. J. McGuire, afterwards general secretary of the Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, was the father of the motion. Shortly after that the Federation of Trades and Labor Unions of the United States and the Knights of Labor, to- gether with various other trades assemblies and central labor unions, indorsed the plan of their labor holiday, and the Cigar- makers' International Union incorporated it in its constitution. The reason given for adopting the labor holiday, apart from any national day, was that labor alone, as a distinct class, had no day which it could call its own. This is the beginning of the Labor Day which was afterwards legalized^^ and which is a permanent monument to the Central Labor Union of New York. Discussing Politics When the Central Labor Union in its early days, 1882-1883, was yet small, and business matters did not demand the entire time of the Sunday meetings, these were generally ended by lively discussions of theoretical questions: the land problem, greenbackism, socialism, anarchism, in short, all sprts of panaceas for the existing social evils. Afterwards, when a considerable number of unions had come in and business had grown larger, no time was left for such discussion, except on rare occasions. But besides the practical problems connected with the eco- " The Puilic, Nov. 3, 1911, p. 1127. "The legalization of Labor Day by the government was mainly due to the agitation and endeavors of the Order of Knights of Labor. 3 [ 279 ] 34 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN nomie struggles of the day, there was one peculiar problem — peculiar in the sense that the Central Labor Union could not get rid of it — which caused frequent and lively discussion, and this was the subject of independent political action. It is true that after the unsuccessful campaign of 1882, the opponents of inde- pendent political action got the upper hand, and for a time this subject was dropped. But thereafter the constant conflicts of the striking unions with the police, the courts, and the ' ' bad laws' ' brought up this tabooed subject frequently at the meetings of the Central Labor Union, and it usually caused very lively and ex- citing discussions. A special meeting Saturday night, January 24, 1885, was held for the discussion of one phase of the political question: Shall the vote of Trade Unionists be retained as the balance of power ? The discussion was opened by a delegate from the Cigarmakens' Progressive Union, who said that his organization was opposed to anything but independent political action. He pointed out that the steel and iron workers of Pennsylvania had held the balance but had not been able td remove the Conspiracy Law from the statute books of the state. The Cigarmakers' International Union for ten years past had advocated holding the balance of power, but although the tenement house cigar bill was passed, it was later declared unconstitutional. It would be so in every case, he asserted, until the toilers had their own men in the legislature and could make their power felt. "Do you think", he asked, "if the workingmen had shown their power, that the Court of Appeals would have declared that law unconstitu- tional?'-' The next speaker represented the Tinsmiths' Union, which he said was opposed to going into political action of any kind ; the members had voted against it, because the worMhgmen were not yet ready. As to the question of the balance of power, only the leaders advocated that, and for their own selfish purposes. A delegate from Typographical Union No. 6 was in favor of the unions holding the balance of power. He had not read of the reform movement that had not been accomplished by its advo- cates holding the balance. The industrial question would never be solved through the efforts of the workingmen alone. He be- lieved that the way to bring about the desired reform was to cap- [ 280 ] ii SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 35 ture the existing machinery of one of the old parties, and it was only a waste of time to try to construct a new machine. If work- ingmen in New York would only realize that they held the ma- jority of votes, they could get any legislation they wanted. He argued against the policy of excluding politics from trade unions, sajdng that such was a device of the enemy and that unionists tied their hands when they did so. "Politics," said a delegate of the Excelsior Labor Club, "is a business, and that of the most dishonest kind. Whichever of the two present parties gains, the loss will be always with the work- ingmen and the gain on the other side. ' ' At that time, he stated, the worMngmen could not be united. The politics of America, said a delegate, could not be compared with those of any other country. The condition of labor and cap- ital was the same in European countries as here, but not that of politics. Nowhere else was there such a political system as the American, which was that of wage slavery introduced into pol- itics and which could be overthro^vn only by independent politi- cal action by the workingmen. The workers will go into strikes, go through fire and water, bare their breasts to the bullets of the military, and then turn round and vote for the power that oppresses them. It was so in Pennsylvania in 1877 ; it was so in Hocking Valley in 1884. The idea of workingmen holding the balance of power in elections was absurd. They might do it, and it would be all right, if they were diplomats ; but if they had been diplomats they would not need it today. If introduced into- trade unions the idea would cause more disruption and dissen- sion than independent politics. , One of the delegates of the Cigarmakers' Progressive Union- said that although his union voted in favor of independent politic eal action, those who were citizens could not be trusted to abide by that decision. It was the active members who favored inde- pendent politics; the inactive did not care.^" At the next special meeting called for the discussion of inde- pendent political action, January 31, 1885, the question was put before the unions by asking them if they were in favor of the Central Labor Union going into dependent political action, or in "John Swinton's Paper, Feb. 1, 1885, p. 4. [281] 36 BUULBTIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN favor of the Union advocating the workinginen holding the bal- ance of power in elections. These questions caused much debate and excitement in the labor unions. The diversity of opinion did not allow any definite conclusion. While the radical element, led by the Socialists, favored independent political action, the more moderate element opposed it on the ground that ' ' There is plenty of work for or- ganized labor to do in agitation, organization, and education; there is boycotting to be done, arbitrating and strikes to be man- aged and grievances to be adjusted. ' '" The general opinion prevailed that the Central Labor Union must be an industrial organization. "Its policy must continue to be to attract all shades of creeds, colors, and conditions of workers — ^not to repel those whose political ideas are not in conformity with many of those already In the Union. In its meetings the Socialist and Democrat, Greenbacker and Re- publican, must have an equal footing, or the Union will collapse, as others have in the past."" "Would the Central Labor Union in the future go into inde- pendent politics ? This question remained open ; for the present the general opinion was against politics, especially against affilia- tion with any of the existing political parties. But the question of politics at the meetings of the Central Labor Union came up again and again. The punishment and imprisonment of striking and boycotting workers became even more frequent than before, as was shown, for instance, in a picketing case in which a unionist cigarmaker had assaulted a blackleg and had been sentenced to imprisonment for two months. A fellow unionist of the assailant, who had had no part in the affair, appeared in court as a witness for him. He "~ was at once arrested, and under the furious language of District Attorney Purdy and the order of Judge Cowing, was sentenced to three months' imprisonment on Blackwell's Island. In con- ducting the case both District Attorney Purdy and Judge Cowing used denunciatory language in regard to trade unions.^' The "John Swinton's Paper, Nov. 1, 1885, p. 4. '■' The affiliation of the Central Labor Union as a body with any non- labor political party (Democratic, Republican, or other) was prohibited by the Constitution. [282] SPBEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 37 case was taken up by the Central Labor Union to induce the gov- ernor to pardon the witness so sentenced. In addition to these conflicts with the governmental authori- ties, the question of politics was kept alive in the usual way by the old party politicians, who tried to catch the votes of organized labor by pointing to what they had already done for labor and by promising to do yet more in the future. As a reward for achievements and promises they endeavored to get the indorse- ment of the labor organizations. This persistent besieging by the politicians was a cause of incessant debate on politics at the meetings of the Central Labor Union, though indorsement of the politicians was in every case refused. Conclusion Summing up this short review of the history of the Central Labor Union from its beginning to the middle of 1886, we must conclude that it was a great factor in the labor movement in the Eastern section of the country at that time. It bore all the charac- teristics of an independent class movement of wage earners. Its leaders and members were exclusively workingmen. Their de- mands were practical labor demands, chiefly in the economic field. When defeat after defeat followed in the economic struggle, they went into independent politics, and if they failed there they tem- porarily turned to economic and educational work till more fa- vorable times arrived. Another characteristic of the Central Labor Union, in com- parison with other typical labor unions, was its radicalism, which is not explained alone by the depressed economic conditions and legal prosecutions of labor at that time, but by the peculiarities of the constituents of the Central Labor Union itself, and by current social philosophies. A large number of its members, were immigrants, mostly Irish, Germans, and Bohemians. The Irish immigrants were at that time, when the Home Rule agitation was at. its height, strongly under the influence of ' the radical and energetic political refugees who were their leaders. Moreover, the foundation of the Central Labor Union had some connections with the Irish movement in Ireland, as before men- ^'JoJin Swinton's Paper, May 17, 1885, p. 4. [283] 38 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN tioned, and the Union was always ready to give its moral sup- port to the suffering Irish people. The "Pay-No-Rent" move- ment in Ireland was very popular among the Irish immigrants in America. They considered the land question as a reform ab- solutely necessary to the amelioration of the lot of the laboring people. The German immigrants also were represented by the radical elements. Socialism was making progress in Germany at that time, and the immigrants from there, at least a majority of them, spread abroad socialistic views. The same was true of the immigrants from Austria, — the Germans and Bohemians. Then came the French and other immigrants from southern Europe — also radical in a measure. Add to these the Scandinavians, the immigrants from Russia (mostly radical Jews), and finally the American-born workers, and we have a multi-colored picture of the constituents of the Central Labor Union. Partly in this diversity of the members of the Central Labor Union is found the explanation of a third peculiarity. The Cen- tral Labor Union had not and could not have any definite tactics, nor a theoretical viewpoint of its existence and purpose. It tried economic methods, then politics, then education, then again poli- tics. In its struggle it used every possible means which it con- sidered at this or that time proper. It was experimenting. The theoretical views of the members also were confused and con- tradicted each other to a great extent. As a body the Union had either to accept all the theories of members, without asking w'hether they contradicted each other, or whether they were right or wrong, or to refuse to accept any theory. It usually refused to hold any definite theory, but when, as in the case of entering independent politics, such action became necessary, it embodied all current theories, though contradictory with one another, in its political platform — unionism and socialism, singletax and greenbackism, as in the political platform of the campaign of 1886. Though the Central Labor Union lacked definite tactics and consistent theory, the beginning of modern trade unionism can nevertheless be traced back to the Central Labor Union as well as to other labor organizations of that time. The Central Labor Union emphasized the economic side of the labor movement and [284] SPEEK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 39 ^ the necessity of ha-nng better labor laws ; it advocated arbitra- tion in trade disputes, and represented a form of constitutional government hitherto not very successful among laborers ; finally, its leaders and agitators developed very definite and modern views on trade unionism. In one of the reports of the secretary of the Central Labor Union the following idea is expressed : "What we need Is to elevate the labor movement above the plane on which it is treading to a level with capitalism. We have knocked too long at the back doors, taken off our hats too humbly, and bowed our salaams too lowly. We must stand more erect; and to enable us to do this, we must respect ourselves and force recognition from the employers.""' To elevate labor to the level of capital is the corner stone of the theory of modern trade unionism. ^John Swinton's Paper, Oct. 25, 1885, p. 4. 40 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN CHAPTEK III OTHER LABOR ORGANIZATIONS The Knights of Labor The most important labor organization in New York in the middle eighties, after the Central Labor Union, was the Order of the Knights of Labor, organized by Uriah S. Stephens in Phila- delphia on December 13, 1869, as a secret labor organization to promote industrial cooperation. Its growth was slow at first, but in 1878, when the veil of secrecy was thrown off, its membership began rapidly to increase. The year 1878 was also the date of national organization. During the early eighties the Knights increased in number to 50,000, but owing to the indefiniteness of the aim of the Order its membership fluctuated widely. The Order was organized in assemblies, trade or mixed, which in their turn were territorially united in district assemblies, so that the last-named in any one locality embraced all of the organized trades. The district assemblies formed the General Assembly of the Knights of Labor, which elected a Grand Master Workman and a General Executive Board. The government of the Order was centralized, the General Assembly having supreme and abso- lute authority over the district and local assemblies. The growth of the order was stimulated by the industrial de- pression which set in during 1883. The Order took up strikes and boycotts and also extended its activities toward industrial cooperation. The great gain in membership came primarily from the unskilled workers in the principal cities which at that time were largely of native American or North-European stock, es- pecially Irish. The total membership in the country was about 125,000 in 1885, but in 1886 it rose to nearly 700,000.^ New • Record of Proceedings of the General Assembly of the Knights of La- ior of America, Richmond, Va., 1886, p. 328. [286] SPEBK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 41 York contributed a large share of this increase. On July 1, 1886, there were in the city, of New York and its vicinity assemblies of the Order as follows:^ District Assembly Number of Members Number of Local Assemblies Trade No. 46 138 60,800 1,938 1,704 3,329 13 366 11 9 16 Telegraphers Mixed No. 49 No. 64 No. 85 No. 91 Shoemakers District Assemblies 5.... 67,912 , ,415 The largest and most prominent among the organizations was District Assembly 49. It played a leading part in the life of the Order. Many local assemblies in the city of New York, under different names, were represented in the Central Labor Union, pearly one-half of the delegates of the Union were Knights of Labor and their sympathize^ The advocacy by the Order of industrial cooperation, and the attempt to put it into practice as a substitute for the wage-systein, remind us of the main lines of the modern French syndicalism. The difference between them is not so much in philosophy as in tactics. Syndicalism is aggressive, revolutionary, while the tac- tics of the Order were defensive, reserved, and to a certain ex- tent conservative. The relation of the Order to politics was neutral, although\it contained an influential faction which favored independent politi- cal action. This faction was composed of Greenbackers and So- cialists. With the ' former the Order as a whole maintained friendly relations, since it officially endorsed, in its preamble, their demand for currency reform. But the relations between the Order and the Socialists were somewhat strained, notwithstanding the nearly socialistic preamble of the Order. The founders and early leaders of the Order held more radical views upon the social 'nid., pp. 326-328. [287] 42 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP "WISCONSIN question than did the later members, and at the beginning of the eighties several prominent Socialists, Philip Van Patten and others, joined the Order, and the Socialist papers sympathized with its objects. The members of a local assembly in New York bearing the name of the Excelsior Club were almost all Socialists. Besides this, several Socialist local unions, among them the Progressive Cigarmakers', belonged to the Order. The Socialists tried to acquire a predominating influence but failed. Hence the relations between them and the Order became to a certain extent strained, especially after the election of T. V. Powderly to the position of general master workman of the Order. The Socialists accused the Order and its head, Mr. Powderly, of conservatism, saying that they had turned to a "middle class" philosophy and had made the principles of the Order a "dead letter". Besides this, the Socialists did not favor the secrecy, the ceremonies, rituals, and religious sentiment in the Order. The Greenbackers The Greenback movement got its somewhat awkward name from the legal-tender notes issued in 1862 by the Federal Gov- ernment to the amount of $450,000,000, mainly for the payment of the Civil War expenses. The backs of these notes were printed in green. Previous to the Civil War the farming localities in the western agricultural states and territories were in poor condition; they lacked markets for their products; the means of transportation and communication were not yet developed. But during the war the government became a heavy customer of easy access for the farmers over all the country. The prices of products went up, and the farmers were paid by the government in greenbacks. Thus they got money, and the mortgages on farms, originally due in gold, were paid in greenbacks at from 50 to 60 per cent dis- count. In the middle of the sixties agriculture enjoyed a consid- erable prosperity, which was explained in part by the better cur- rency system founded upon the issue of greenbacks. These notes became very important and were advocated by men of all parties — especially by farmers in the agricultural states — as a remedy for economic and other social evils in the country at that time. [288] SPEEK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT _ 43 Such sentiment in favor of greenbacks was supported by the feeling that the eastern bankers who held most of the government bonds had made a hard bargain with the government in the time of war ; they paid for the bonds in greenbacks worth from 38 to 75 cents on the dollar, and they would have been paid in return in greenbacks, at nearly the same discount, had they not influ- ■enced Congress to .pay them "in coin"^ even when such payment was not required on the face of the bond.* As it was, they would get more than their due. Again, the value of silver began to de- crease in comparison with the value of gold, and the big financiers were supposed to have influenced the Congress in 1873=* to de- monetize silver. In this way the feeling that the capitalists had formed a secret plot against the people's money — greenbacks and silver dollars — was aroused. Thus the Greenback movement originated in the financial legis- lation and struggle growing out of the conditions of the Civil War. But currency reform was only the manifestation of the movement. Behind it were the deeper economic needs of the masses — farmers, wage-earners, and small manufacturers. It was the beginning of private industrial control over markets, credit, and transportation facilities by middlemen and bankers united into large capitalistic combinations, and the Greenback movement was a revolt against these controlling combinations. The masses lacked credit at a low rate of interest. Transport facilities were controlled by a few on the basis of the preference rates, so that the small producers were driven out. They could not reach the market directly, but were dependent upon the middleman, who got the biggest profit from the rising of prices. There was no so-called class-conscious movement in the modern sense. The farmers, wage-earners, and small manufacturers joined forces, as producers. The movement was started by the wage-earners, together with the small manufacturers, and was afterwards joined and led by the farmers. They all had the same philosophy, based upon the interests of small owners. While the farmer represented in his person the laborer and the small producer, the wage-earner was desirous of becoming also an inde- = The Act of March 18, 1869. *The payment of some bonds was required "in money", some "in gold." " The law which stopped the free coinage of silver. [289] 44 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN pendent small producer. He was interested in high prices, which meant abundance of employment at increased wages, and this in turn meant a possibilitj'^ of saving and afterwards of independent small enterprise. To get rid of the middleman through produc- tive cooperation was the aim of the movement at its beginning. This cooperation was to be not of laborers, but of small producers. But most of the attempts in productive cooperation failed be- cause of the lack of credit and market, and if some rare coopera- tive enterprise succeeded, its members became big capitalists — employers like others against whom the movement was being car- ried on. When prices began to fall, the leaders of the movement turned their attention to the government, from which they tried to get help in the form of ' ' cheap money ' '. Thus the cooperative movement was transformed into the Greenback movement in the financial crisis of 1873. At the first Greenback Convention at Indianapolis in that year, the following demands upon the government were adopted : First, that the national bank-note currency should be withdrawn ; second, that the only currency should be of paper, and that cur- rency should be made exchangeable for bonds bearing interest at 3.65 per cent; and third, that coin might be used for the pay- ment of the interest and principal of such bonds, and only such, as expressly called for coin payments. At the National Greenback Convention held at Indianapolis, Peter Cooper, of New York, and Samuel Cary, of Ohio, were nominated for president and vice president. They received 82,000 votes. The labor agitation at the time of the great strikes, especially in 1877, considerably reinforced the Greenback movement. It was joined by many labor organizations which until that time had not taken any active part in it. As a result of such coalition a National Greenback-Labor Convention was held at Toledo, Ohio, in 1878. To the Greenback platform were added labor de- mands, which made the movement very popular also among the wage-earners in the East. The party's ticket polled over 1,000,- 000 votes, and 14 representatives were sent to Congress. In 1880 the Greenback-Labor party's nominees, James Weaver for president and B. J. Chambers for vice president, got only 300,000 votes, but 8 representatives were elected to Congress. [290] SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 45 At the National Convention of the party in 1884 (May 29) a platform was adopted which was partly as follows : "A joint effort Is being made by the old party leaders to overthrow the sovereign constitutional power of the people to control their own financial affairs and issue their own money, in order to forever enslave the masses to bankers and other business. The House of Representatives has passed bills reclaiming nearly one hundred mil- lion acres of lands granted to and forfeited by railroad companies. These bills have gone to the Senate, a body composed largely of aristocratic millionaires, who, according to their own party papers, generally purchased their elections in order to protect great monopo- lies which they represent. . . . "We demand the issue of such money (legal-tender notes^ greenbacks) in sufficient quantities to supply the actual demand of trade and commerce. "We want that money which saved our country in time of war, and which has given it prosperity and happiness In peace."' The party's ticket of that year was headed by General B. .F. Butler, endorsed also by the Anti-Monopoly organization ; he re- ceived only 175,000 votes. After this failure the party began to break up. Many Green- back leaders went over to the old parties, especially in the West, where the farmers constituted the majority of the party, while in the East where the majority was made up of wage-earners, the members turned their main attention to the labor movement proper. The social philosophy of the Greenbackers was a kind of eco- nomic individualism with anarchistic tendencies. The Green- backers emphasized the individual side of the relations between individuals and society, and emphatically advocated banking re- form by which everybody could secure money for his enterprise. But their tactics were opposed to the anarchistic tactics proper. They recognized the state, government, and politics, representing a definite political movement. In the middle of the eighties there were, in the eastern states, a considerable number of Greenbackers among the members of local unions, especially in New York, still advocating, besides labor demands, the Greenbackers' currency reform. •Edward Stanwood, A History of the Presidency, Boston, 1906, pp. 425 and 426. [291] 46 bulletin of the university of wisconsin The Socialists The most important theoretical group in the labor movement of New York in the middle eighties was the group of Socialists. The majority of early Marxian Socialists in America were Ger- man wage-earners. At the end of the sixties they organized in New York the "AUgemeiner Deutscher Arbeiterverein" (the General German Labor Society) , which was affiliated for a short time with the National Labor Union. Withdrawing from that body in 1869, it joined the International Working-Men's Associa- tion under the name of Section I of New York. After the financial crisis in 1873 a number of small Socialist parties were organized in the East and Middle West. In 1876, at a representative meeting of those organizations, the Working- men's Party of the United States, with a Marxist program, was formed. The next year, the party name was changed to the So- cialist Labor Party of North America. After the failures in independent politics and an unsuccessful coalition with the Greenbackers and other radicals in 1880, their political aspirations were much lowered. The hard struggle with the Anarchists at the beginning of the eighties especially ab- sorbed their energy. Besides this, many obstacles stood in their way : first, they were immigrants, looked upon as strangers here ; they could liot easily understand the American conditions, and many of them could not even speak English; and second, the majority of the American-born wage-earners had the individu- alistic and small owner's psychology expressed in the desire to start independent enterprises and to "make money ",^ instead of struggling for another social order. The political methods used in the despotic European countries could not be applied to America, where the people practically had suffrage, civil liberties and a democratic form of government. Somewhat discouraged in independent polities, the Socialists started in 1884 on another course of activity. They concentrated on organization, agitation and propaganda, or what they termed ' This business spirit of the American masses at that time may be partly explained by the numerous opportunities for small business in the new coun- try in its early history, and by the enterprising spirit of immigrants, many of whom came here to look for Individual fortunes. [292] SPEBK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 47 the education of the masses. The lowest point of their activity was in 1883 ; they had only 30 sections, with a total membership of about 1500. In 1884 they organized 21 new sections in the various states of the East and Middle West. In 1885 they had already 61 sections. In the middle eighties the center of their organized movement gathered around the New York Yolkszeitung under the leader- ship of its editors, Sergius E. Shevieh and Alexander Jonas. The Yolkszeitung was more moderate, and favored the trade union movement and educational work by the Socialists, while the more radical wing around the Executive Committee of the party and its newly established organ Ber Sozialist, under the leader- ship of V. L. Rosenberg, preferred independent political action to the union movement. Still the relations between these two factions were friendly and the influence of the Yolkszeitung dominated in New York. At the fifth National Convention in Cincinnati, in October, 1885, a platform was adopted with the following main ideas and demands:'* Labor is the self-evident creator of all wealth and civilization. Laborers must enjoy the product of their toil, but the fruits of labor are in a great measure appropriated by the owners of the means of production. Then follows the Marxian criticism of the contemporary social order. To replace this by the Socialistic order the platform demands : "That tlie land, the Instruments of production (machines, factories, etc.) and all the products of labor, become the common property of the whole people; and that all production be organized cooperatively and be carried on under the direction of the commonwealth; also the cooperative distribution of the products in accordance with the service rendered, and with the just needs of the individuals." To realize such order it is necessary to gain control of the political power by the wage-earning class. They demanded : "Abolition of the Presidency, Vice Presidency and Senate of the United States. An Executive Board to be established, whose mem- bers are to be elected and may at any time be recalled by the House of Representatives as the only legislative body. The states and 'Platform and constitution of the Socialistic Labor Party, adopted at the 5th National Convention in Cincinnati, October, 1885, pp. 1-5. [293] 48 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN municipalities to Adopt corresponding amendments of tUeir constitu- tions and statutes;"" direct vote and secret ballots in all elections ; universal suffrage without regard to color, creed, or sex ; election days to be legal holidays; the principle of minority representation to be intro- duced; initiative, referendum, and recall of the members of all legislative bodies; administration of justice to b,e free of charge; abolition of capital punishment ; and other democratic demands. At the same convention a resolution was adopted to the effect that the Socialistic Labor party was to be regarded chiefly as a propagandist party, but the sections themselves were to decide whether to go into politics or not. At the end of the resolution is the following statement : "Sections participating in any election shall under no circumstances enter into any combination with any other party as against the labor party; and other parties are to be considered as reactionary." The Socialists very strongly emphasized the labor side of their movement. Besides the socialistic idea the labor demands were given great importance in their platform, and in the latter was also the following statement : "The Socialistic Labor Party claims the title 'Labor Party' because It recognizes the existence of an oppressed class of wage-workers as its fundamental truth, and the emancipation of this oppressed labor- ing class as its foremost object."" In their constitution was also a requirement that no less than three-fourths of the members of a party section must b,e wage- earners ; this restriction was not applied to farmers. Their party organization was simple and worked smoothly. A local organization was called a section or branch. Every new member was examined as to whether he knew the party platform and constitution. Every. member paid five cents monthly taxes. In each locality or city where two or more sections existed, a central committee was elected. The highest authority was vested in the National Convention of all sections. At this convention the National Executive Committee was elected. The referendum • Itid. " Ibid. [294] SPBB3K — SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 49 vote was practiced. The party had no president. The, pres- idential duties were performed by the Executive Committee, with the initiative vested in its secretary. The Socialists consid- ered such form of their party organization as the most democratic constitutional government, and in this lies the cause of their opposition to the presidency, vice presidency, and Senate of the United States, favoring instead the National Executive Board constituted of several elected persons. Recovering from political failures, the Socialists increased their activity along the line of their new; course started in 1884. They worked in the labor unions and in any kind of labor organization, opposition to the presidency, vice presidency, and Senate of the their small number, their influence in the labor unions increased rapidly, especially in the Central Labor Union of New York. Their doctrine of the conflict of interests, between the wage- earning class and the capitalist class,- was recognized by the majority of the members of the Union, though the latter as a body did not accept the whole Socialistic philosophy. How- ever,, the labor demands were the basis of their cooperation. The above described labor organizations and social philosophies constituted two main, and more or less distinct, movements : An economic on a larger, and a political on a smaller, scale. The first was represented by the Trade Unions and the Knights of Labor ; the second, by the Greenbackers and the Socialists. In the East, especially in New York, an industrial center, aU these forms of organization and schools of thought existed side by side. There were yet some minor organizations with radical views, as Land-Nationalizers, Free-Soilers, Anti-Monopolists, a small Singletax Club, and others, but their influence upon the labor movement was insignificant. [ 295 ] 50 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN CHAPTER IV THE "GRAND LEGAL ROUND-UP" OF STRIKERS AND BOYCOTTERS The industrial advancement in the decade, 1880-1890, was characterized by the introduction of the intensive use of im- proved machinery, by production on a larger scale, by the ex- tension of the domestic and international markets, and by the in- creased bargaining power of merchants and manufacturers over consumers and wage earners, resulting from the establishment in increasing numbers of wholesale houses and exchanges, and from the organization of employers' and manufacturers' associations and, finally, monopolistic industrial combinations — ^trusts, pools, and all sorts of price and other agreements, including banking institutions controlling credit. Organized capital bore heavily upon labor. Labor legislation was meager. Not only were the few laws enacted to protect labor inadequately enforced, but they were largely declared by the courts unconstitutional or interpreted in such a manner as to operate against labor. The policy of the controlling political parties in that respect was based upon the shortsighted and nar- row-minded spirit of money making, a sort of practical mate- N;:ialism. It is no wonder that such a spirit bore its fruit in political spoils and corruption. The securing of governmental jobs through bribery, or, as it was more mildly expressed, through "investment" (in politics for personal ends) was the accepted mode of procedure and was talked of openly even by the higher officials.^ Tammany Hall reigned supreme over the municipal ipor example, Thomas P. Walsh, a gambler with the nickname "Fatty," was appointed warden of the Tombs (prison). This appointment was re- ceived by the public with great dissatisfaction. The labor press protested strongly against it. Ex-coroner W. H. Kennedy met the protest as fol- [296] SPBEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 51 government, and nowhere was found such open corruption as in the city of New York. With the industrial depression the labor movement grew more intense. Eeduction of wages and unemployment were common. Cheap immigrant labor, contracted for and imported from other countries, female and child labor, and contract prison labor, were widely employed by manufacturers. A wave of strikes and lock- outs spread over the country, and the majority of strikes failed ; at the same time failed the nation-wide eight-hour movement of May, 1886. The struggle between opposing forces, employers and employees, was desperate and cruel. On one side were used as weapons, strikes and boycotts ; on the other side, lockouts, black- listing, and iron-clad oaths. How generally these weapons were actually used cannot be definitely stated; in many cases they were employed secretly, which made it impossible to record the data. Only a few official reports speak occasionally of the black-list and iron-clad practices of employers. Nevertheless, the cruelty of these weapons was keenly felt, discussed, and condemned by wage-earners at their meetings and in their press all over the country at that time, with an understanding that these weapons were aimed not so much against individual workingmen as against labor organiza- tions and their concerted actions in general. The black-listed men appeared quite often to be the local labor leaders, either spokesmen or organizers. Such persecution of leaders, among other causes, helped considerably to stir up organized labor. To understand better the actual situation at that time, it is necessary to explain in brief the immediate underlying causes of the labor excitement in 1886. The Third Annual Eeport of the Commissioner of Labor^ shows the relative numbers of strikes and lockouts and the results of strikes. There were in 1886 twice as many strikes As in 1885, and three times as many as in any lows : "I do not know why the people are raising such a fuss about this appointment of 'Fatty'. He has been a great service to the County Democ- racy down in this district, and he ought to have something. I myself have spent a good deal of money in politics, and I think that it is only faif and just that 'Fatty' should have a, job. He was promised it and he ought to have it, and there is an end. 'Fatty' got the biggest bulk of money to distribute at the polls." — The StoMdard, No. Jan. 8, 1887. ^ Third Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor; 1887, pp. 12-15. [297] 52 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN previous year of the period pf 1881-1886, and the proportion of failures was nearly the same. Most of the strikes (75 per cent) and their failures occurred in the five principal industrial states : New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Ohio, and Illinois. The number of employees locked out in 1886 was five times as large as in any previous year during the period of 1881-1886, and the same proportion prevailed in respect to establishments involved in lockouts, 92.98 of which were in the five principal industrial states named. If we take New York separately we find there the largest num- ber of establishments affected by strikes and lockouts in 1886.* During the year ending October 31, 1886, the number of estab- lishments in which labor troubles of one kind or another had takien place, was 2,316 ; the 2,120 strikes included 127,392 worlj- ers and affected 2,061 shops, to which it is necessary to add the , 59 shops with the "threatened strikes." Conciliation took place in 249 shops, conciliation with employes 81, with the Knight's of Labor 321, with unions (a majority with the Central Labor Union) 511, total 1,162; no formal settlement, 20; arbitration, 11 ; abandoned, 430 ; pending, 52 ; blank, 386 ; gra,nd total, 2,061.* The above data are by no means complete. They include only the numbers of strikes, strikers, and shops, of which official in- formation was received by the Bureau of Statistics of Labor of the state of New York. The more rapid growth of the number of lockouts than that of strikes demonstrates that organized capital was quite aggressive in its conflicts with labor in 1886. We find in the Report of the New York Bureau the following statement in regard to the lockouts in that state for the year 1886 : "Strong and bitter denunciation has been expressed in several por- tions of the State against employers and corporations who locked out their uncomplaining employees for no other reason than that other employers in the same trade or industry had locked out theirs. The conditions upon which the shops, mills or factories were to be opened were that such and such men or women should leave the trade union or the Knights of Labor Assembly, as the case might be."" ' Ibid. ' Fourth Annual Report of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor of the State of New York for the year 1886, Albany, 1887, pp. 418-419. 'Ibid., p. 417. [298] SPEBK— SINGL.BTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 53 How a typical lockout was conducted by the employerf/ asso- ciations is shown in a description on the same page of the report. Cigarmakers were on a strike against the reduction of wages. The strike was followed by a lockout, which lasted from January 20 to February 12, 1886, and in which the leading manufac- turers united. The labor union committee was invited to atr tend a manufacturers' meeting. When the representatives of labor appeared, the chairman of the meeting met them and an- nounced the decision of the manufacturers : ' ' Gentlemen, we have decided to lock out aU our hands until the employees of Messrs. L. return to work. This is offtcial. ' ' This decision was posted at the several shops. The secretary of the union asked: "Isn't this the very essence of a boycott or conspiracy?" That the year 1886 represented the culmination of the con- flict between organized employers and wage earners, owing to the general conditions above described, and that the state of New York, headed by its metropolis, was the center of that conflict, is further supported by the following quotation from the same re- port: "The year 1886 has witnessed a more profound and far more ex- tended agitation among the members of organized labor than any- previous year in the history of our country . . . With but rare exceptions organized labor has continued in this state with greater success and vigor than before, to agitate, to strike, and to boycott during the past year. The year 1886 will be forever remembered as one of the greatest importance in the battle waged between capital and labor; the failures and successes of which, let us trust, will not be lost, or fall to serve as lessons of value to the student of social and economic questions."" The intensified struggle between employers and wage earners found expression in the legislative, police, and court activities, or what is termed by the official report as "a grand legal round- up" of strikers and boycotters, which served as fuel to the fire oJ^ labor excitement. In the early history of the state of New York there was no statute regulating disputes between employers and employees, except the laws concerning crimes against public justice and the common law against conspiracy. But as time went on, the 'IMd., p. 8. [299] 54 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN courts declared that conspiracies to "injure" and "coerce" were criminal conspiracies/ and in this way the question of criminality of combination in restraint of trade was introduced into prac- tice. Then the statutory law enacted (1828-1830) made com- bination in restraint of trade criminal. On July 26, 1881, was adopted the Penal Code, which entirely revolutionized the laws applicable to labor disputes. The con- spiracy law was widened directly and indirectly. It provided that an agreement to commit a crime was a misdemeanor.* In 1882 the Penal Code was partly revised and modified and the fifth subdivision in section 168 was added as a new provision. The following specific crimes entirely new to the statute law of the state were included : "653. A person who, with a view to compel another person to do or to abstain from doing an act which such other person has a legal right to do or to abstain from doing, wrongfully and unlawfully — "1. Uses violence or inflicts injury upon such other person or his family or a member thereof, or upon his property or threatens such violence or injury; or "2. Deprives any such person of any tool, implement, or clothing, or hinders him in the use thereof; or "3. Uses or attempts the intimidation of such person by threats of force, "Is guilty of misdemeanor." A misdemeanor could be punished by one year 's imprisonment and $500 fine." After the gas stokers' strike, the following new provision of the Penal Code was passed : "673. Endangering life ty refusal to lahor. A person who wil- fully and maliciously, either alone or in combination with others, breaks a contract of service or hiring, knowing or having reason- able cause to believe that the possible consequences of his so doing will be to endanger human life or to cause grievous bodily injury or to expose valuable property to destruction or serious injury, is guilty of a misdemeanor."" ''Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor of the State of New York, 1887, p. 670. 'Ihid., pp. 653 and 670. 'Ibid., p. 669. w JMd. [300] SPEBK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 55 In regard to that provision, the quoted official report says : "It should not have been limited to contracts of service and hiring, however. That makes it look like class legislation.'""^ A new section in the Penal, Code provides : "675. Acts not expressly forMdden. A person who wilfully com- mits any act which seriously injures the person or property of an- other, or which seriously disturbs or endangers the public peace or health, or which openly outrages public decency, for which no other pimishment is expressly described by this code. Is guilty of misde- meanor."" The report comments on the above section : "The section is very elastic, loose, general, and ambiguous. If all the Test of the Code were repealed, every known crime could be pun- ished under this section. Any act which 'seriously injures' another is a crime under section 675. Under a free construction of the Penal Code the law of conspiracy can be carried to extreme lengths, in cases growing out of labor troubles."" Such was the progress of the criminal laws affecting labor dis- putes in the state of New York in the first half of the eighties. The laws were partly borrowed from the English laws, but while the latter were progressing "steadily toward the complete elim- ination of combinations as an element of the criminality in crimes growing out of labor troubles, our law has as steadily tended the other way. ' '^* The leaders of the Central Labor Union claimed that the Penal Code contained laws with the characteristics of class legislation in favor of organized capital and against organized labor in their disputes, and that the legislatures in the enactment of such laws were influenced directly and indirectly by manufacturers through corrupt lobbying and similar practices. Nevertheless, no matter how one-sided and severe the criminal laws were, peaceful striking, boycotting and picketing were not directly prohibited by law. Orgatdzed labor made use of these methods, trying to " Ibid. ''Ibid., pp. 669 and 670. "/Bid. ^' Fifth Annual Rejiort of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor of the State of New York, 1887, p. 670 and 671. [301] 56 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN avoid every unlawful act such as violence and threats, not to speak of bloodshed, which occurred in several western cities at that time. That the labor movement in New York at that time was peaceful, though very earnest and pronounced, is pointed, out also by the oiScial report.^^ Striking, picketing and boycotting against reduction of wages, lockouts, and so forth, went on. Now it remained for the police and courts to step in and, on the ground of existing criminal sec- tions of the Penal Code to try to check organized labor in its war activities. This they did under the influence and pressure of the manufacturers, -who, in their turn were influenced by the depressed industrial conditions. Public opinion was rather hostile toward organized labor and its struggle, owing to the country-wide wave of strikes and their violence and effectiveness, and, in part, to the fact that the labor press was weak as against the powerful and influential press which was on the side of the manufacturers and consumers, or, as they termed At, "the general public." The labor move- ment, its real causes, nature, and meaning, were entirely misun- derstood by the last named. In its eyes the labor unions, the Knights of Labor, and other organizations were no more than hordes of anarchists and rioters,^" while the labor movement it- self was branded as "unpatriotic," "un-American," imported from starving Europe, etc. There is no doubt that such "opin- ion" was maniifactured mainly by the big newspapers more or less closely connected with the employers' interests. Another cause of such opinion was the public ignorance, against which the weak labor press, read mainly among the organized working people themselves, was quite powerless. That the hostile public opinion served as an encouragement for the police and court ac- tivities cannot be questioned. In 1886 in the city of New York alone, in addition to many un- warranted arrests of strikers, pickets, and boycotters, more than 100 members of labor organizations were indicted for conspiracy, coercion, and extortion. Five members were convicted of extor- tion and sentenced to the state prison at Sing Sing for extended ^"Fourth Annual Report of the Burea/u of Statistics of Lahor of the State of New York, 1887, p. 8. ''John Svjinton's Paper, Nov. 7, 1886, p. 1, col. 3. [302] SPBBK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 57 terms. Six men were convicted of conspiracy to prevent an em- ployer from carrying on a lawful business, and were sentenced to short terms in the city prison or county penitentiary.^'^ To demonstrate the character of ;the police and court activities against organized labor, it is necessary to quote and analyze, in brief only, several typical cases. dn March 18, 1886, the tailors employed by Cavanagh, Sanford & Co., New York, went on strike for the union scale of wages. The strike failed and a boycott was declared. The police began to arrest pickets day after day on different charges, such as dis- orderly conduct on the street and obstructing the sidewalk. Some of the arrested pickets were fined small amounts and some were discharged for the lack of evidence to support the charges. The picketing went on. Finally, on April 19, a police justice ordered charges of conspiracy to be preferred against the pickets. As a result they were held for the grand jury and soon indicted. In this way all forty-seven tailors were, under the conspiracy charge, subsequently indicted for participation in boycott.^* On April 5 the Bakers' Union No. 1 declared a boycott against the Gray Bakery, the owner of which refused to recognize the union. A circular distributor was arrested on the street for "re- fusing to move on", and was fined. The pickets ("sandwich men") were arrested in a body and fined, the justice telling them, however, that they were not convicted of boycotting, but of dis- orderly conduct on the street. The boycotters did not cease op- eration till, on April 20, indictments were found by the grand jury against the secretary of the Bakers' Union, the "walking delegate", the "sandwich men," the circular distributor, and others — altogether thirteen men participating in the boycott. They were charged with conspiracy and coercion under sections 168 and 653 of the Penal Code.^" In the case of the strike and boycott against Mrs. Landgraff, a bakery owner (the case reported as People vs. Kostka), 18 mem- bers of the Bohemian Bakers' Union were indicted April 9, under sections 168 and 653 of the Penal Code, for coercion and con- " Fourth Anrmal Report of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor of the State of New York, 18S6, p. 744. ''Hid., p. 748. ^Ibid., pp. 749 and 752. [ 303 ] 58 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF- WISCONSIN spiracj^ to prevent Mrs. Landgraff from carrying on a lawful trade by threats and intimidation.^" Such wholesale imprisonment of strikers, pickets and boy- cotters aroused the sentiment of organized labor. They under- stood that the alleged causes of their arrests and convictions, such as disorderly conduct, refusal to move on, obstructing the side- walk, or coercion and* conspiracy, were merely flimsy pretexts, and that the real object of the police and the courts was the elimination of striking, picketing, and boycotting. Furthermore, they believed that such attacks upon the labor men were made in favor of the employers, and this they considered a very grave injustice to them. Finally they felt that in such attacks the in- dividuals and their interests were not so much involved as the general relations between capital and labor. The talk of independent labor politics as a remedy against the evil described became general in labor circles, and the element favoring such labor politics again got a foothold in the unions and other labor organizations. This occurred not only in New York, but all over the country, because conditions were very much the same everywhere. Now came the final blow — the Theiss Case in New York. In March the Carl Sahm Club of musicians (a local assembly of the Knights of Labor under the jurisdiction of District Assembly 49) declared a boycott, after an unsuccessful strike, against George Theiss, a proprietor of an entertainment hall, a music and beer garden, on East 14th Street. The Waiters' Union and Bartenders' Union also had griev- ances against Theiss on the ground of low wages, oppressive rules,^^ and rough handling of employees. Both unions appealed to the Central Labor Union, which tried several times to negotiate and arbitrate. But as Theiss positively rejected, in unbecoming language, any proposal to arbitrate, the Central Labor Union sanctioned a general boycott against Theiss 's place.^^ On March 10, several pickets were arrested on a charge of disorderly conduct. But the evidence did not show such conduct, "lUd., p. 672. " John Swinton' s Paper, July 11, 1886, p. 1. '^ Fourth Annual Report of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor of the State of New York, 1886, p. 745. [304] SPEEK — SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 59 and the prisoners were discharged. ^^ The next day more pickets were arrested on a new and different charge, namely, of engaging in a "parade without a permit from the police board. "^* Again the justice could not find any proper law to justify the charge, and the prisoners were released.^" The pickets, taught by the previous cases, were very careful to avoid any acts for which they could be convicted by law. And so the boycotting and picketing went on until a brewer named George Ehret, and a certain baker, from whom Theiss bought beer and bread, fearing that the sales of their goods would fall off owing to the boycott, brought about a meeting between Theiss and a conmiittee repre- senting the boycotters and the Central Labor Union, and consist- ing of the following members : Archibald 'Leary, Charles Bead- less, Max Danhouser, Hans Holdorf, and A. Rosenberg. AU these men, except 'Leary and Beadless, were connected with the organizations involved in the boycott. The meeting took place at Ehret 's brewery; it lasted about eight hours, and was very formal and businesslike in its charac- ter. Ehret presided and his clerk was secretary. All difficulties were talked over and concessions were made by each side, under Ehret 's advice; minutes were kept and an agreement was finally reached; written, and undersigned. The last clause of this re- quired Theiss to pay $1000 to cover the expenses of the boy- cott, which money was afterward paid.^" This case was made the subject of law proceedings, especially in reference to the $1000 payment. The grand jury made a presentation with a great deal of rhetorical pathos, stating that a thorough examination had convinced them that the so-called boycott was an accursed exotic, and they urged every effort of the legislature, the bench, the bar, and the press of the land and of every American citizen to aid in exterminating this hydra- headed monster dragging its loathsome length across the conti- nent, sucMng the very life-blood from our trade and commerce." "Ibid., p. 746. " n>id. ^ Hid. '"John Swinton's Paper, July 11, 1886, p. 1. ^Fourth Annual Report of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor of the State of New York, 1886, p. T45. [305] 60 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN The members of the Central Labor Union Committee, repre- senting the boyeotters, were brought to trial speedily. Paul Wilzig of the Bartenders' Union was first placed before a jury,, charged with extortion under sections 552 and 553 of the Penal Code. Judge George C. Barrett presided in the court. He pre- pared the charges of the court to the jury. His reasoning was in short as follows: The defendants, excited fear on the part of Theiss by threatening to continue the boyccftt by a method which injured the Theiss property (his good will), an act which was intimidation, and as the money was received by intimidation the defendants were guilty of extortion. The defendants set forth the arguments that they did not use any violence, force, or threat, except their desire to continue a peaceful boycott, not prohibited by law, unless Theiss should not agree to the terms ; that the agreement between the two sides was made by arbitration of a third party and in a most formal, or- derly, and peaceful manner ; that the money paid was not used for their personal purposes; and that the present case consti- tuted a dispute not between individuals but between the employ- ing and employed classes. These arguments did not have any weight with Barrett and the jury. Louis F. Post, of counsel of law committees of the Central Labor Union at that time, says in a recent article: "Not only did Judge Barrett seem to influence the jury in this case- perhaps it was not necessary, the jurors being of the employer type — but he disclosed his class animus further by sentencing those inno- cent-minded workingmen."^ The jury convicted the defendants of extortion under sections 552 and 553 of the Penal Code, and Judge Barrett sentenced them, July 2, 1886, to. imprisonment and penal servitude in the state prison at Sing Sing for various terms as follows: Paul WUzig and Hans Holdorf each for two years and six months; Max Danhouser for three years and eight months ; A. Eosenberg and Michael Strob each for one year and six months. The two latter, by advice of counsel, pleaded guilty under a stipulation that their rights should be protected upon the record of Wil- zig's ease to the same extent that his might be.^° Danhouser, pro- 's The Public, Nov. 3, 1911, p. 1126, col. 2. ^'Fourth Annual Report of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor of the State of New York, 1886, p. 770. [ 306 ] SPBEK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 61 testing "that he did not steal and would not stultify his manhood by pleading guilty, was visited with the severest penalty of all, precisely as he had been threatened when he insisted upon his constitutional right of trial.'""' An appeal for pardon was made by the Central Labor Union on the ground that the convictions were unjust and sentences unduly severe. Governor David HiU said, in allowing the par- don :^^ "The prosecution was novel in its character, and these were the first convictions of the kind in this state. It may be safely stated that, prior to these convictions, it had not been generally understood that such acts as were committed by the prisoners constituted crimes under the Penal Code. "It appears that the money alleged to have been extorted was not appropriated by the prisoners. It was not procured for their own personal aggrandizement. It was paid to Wilzlg, but not a penny of it was either touched or seen by any of the other persons, and Wilzig paid it all over to his union. "The compromise or settlement under which the money was paid seemed to lack many of the elements necessary to constitute 'ex- tortion' as it, had previously been interpreted by the courts. ""'' A part of the general public, not directly interested in the labor struggle and prejudiced neither against capital nor labor, took the viewpoint that the\ convictions and sentences were un- just. ''John Swinton's Paper, July 11, 1886, p. 1, cols. 5 and 6. ^The sentences were all commuted, Oct. 9, 1886, to imprisonment for the term of 100 days, from July 3, 1886 to Oct. 11, 1886. Fourth Annual Re- port of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor of the State of New York, 1886, p. 775. '^Ibid., pp. 777, 778. [307] 62 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN PART TWO CHAPTEE V THE POLITICAL UPRISING OP ORGANIZED LABOR Like the explosion of a shell in the labor circles of New York came Judge Barrett's sentence of the boycotters on July 2, 1886. On the evening of the same day delegates of the Socialist Labor Party, of the Cigarmakers ', Bartenders', and Waiters' Unions, and of the Carl Sahm Club, met to call a mass meeting for the purpose of protesting against the action of the judiciary.^ The call for such a mass meeting through the Central Labor Union was agreed upon unanimously by the gathered representatives of labor. A few days later the Central Labor Union endorsed t}ie call and passed a resolution condemning Judge Barrett 's sen- tence. The mass meeting took place at Cooper Union on July 7. John Swinton, Edward King, John McMackin, and S. E. Shev- ich were the principal speakers. They all insisted on the neces- sity of organizing labor politically. On July 11, 1886, the Central Labor Union of New York and Brooklyn met. A resolution was introduced by Ludwig Jab- linowski, cigarmaker, and seconded by G. Block, secretary of the Bakers' National Union, proposing that a committee be ap- pointed to devise the ways and means for forming an independ- ent political labor organization. At the same time this commit- tee was to consider how a daily newspaper in the interest of labor could be brought into life. After a lively discussion, in which-the radical element took the initiative and strongly sup- 1 The Leaaer, Aug. 6, 1887, p. 2. [308] SPEEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 63 ported the proposed resolutions, the committee was appointed. It met often and discussed its task from different viewpoints. The main conclusions were : ( 1 ) To invite all labor organizations in New York and its vicinity, without consideration of their creed, beliefs or form of organization, to take part in the inde- pendent political action of labor, namely, in the New York city election in the coming fall, and (2) to lay the proposition before all local subordinate labor organizations for its thorough dis- cussion by the individual members. These conclusions of the committee were at once accepted by the Central Labor Union. It was decided to invite all labor and other organizations connected with the labor movement — Labor Unions, Knights of Labor, Greenbaekers, Anti-monopolists, Socialist-Laborers, Land-Re- formers, and others — to discuss the proposition and to send del- egates to a labor conference on August 5, 1886, at Clarendon Hall. The discussion in locals was lively and enthusiastic. Del- egates were elected and instructed. The conference was held on the appointed date in Clarendon HaU. Four hundred and two delegates were present, represent- ing one hundred and sixty-five labor organizations with a mem- bership of fifty thousand wage-earners. Among others the So- cialist Labor party, as a bona fide labor orgaiiization, was repre- sented through its delegates, who, according to the above resolu- tion and invitation, were accepted by the conference. John Devitt, of the Painters' Union, called the assemblage to order, and John Morrison, of the Carpet Weavers', was elected as tem- porary chairman, with James P. Archibald, of the Paper Hang- ers', as temporary secretary. "When the technique of the organization of the conference was completed, Ludwig Jablinowski of the Cigarmakers' Union, a Socialist, made the motion that an Independent Labor party be formed. The motion was seconded by D. Bmrich, George Block, and other Socialists, who among others made the principal speeches. Debate was long and lively. The only opposition was from Typographical Union No. 6, the representatives of which — McKay, Glaekin, and William McCabe— spoke against the mo- tion. McCabe favored the idea that organized labor should hold the balance of power and throw its might into the scale of either the Republican or the Democratic party. Finally the vote was [309] 64 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN taken. Three hundred and sixty-two delegates expressed them- selves as in favor of independent political action by labor, and only forty expressed themselves as against it. At the next meeting of the conference on August 19, there were present 508 delegates from 115 trade organizations — a delegate from every 100 members. A committee of seven on permanent organization was chosen. This committee appointed as perma- nent chairman John McMackin, of the Painters', and as perma- nent secretary James P. Archibald, of the Paper Hangers '.^ The committee went to work, arid in the meantime the several leaders -■ addressed the delegates. When, the committee on permanent organization returned it reported in favor of a new political or- ganization, to be known as the Independent Labor party of New York and vicinity. The report went on to declare a platform of principles in which the ' ' free soil ' ' idea was advocated ; a demand was made that the laborers should share in the products of labor. Among other things asked for were a law forbidding the employ- ment of children under fourteen years of age, the enforcement of the eight-hour law, the abolition of the convict labor system, equal pay for both sexes for equal work, the repeal of the con- spiracy and tramp laws, a law declaring speculation in food products a criminal act; the abolition of the property qualifica- tion for jurors, and the abolition of tenement-house cigarmak- ing.' Henry Gtegrge Steps In The labor leaders were looking for a suitable standard bearer in the movement. The opinion prevailed among them that their candidate for mayor should be a labor man, belonging to no par- ticular faction, honest, with a high reputation and widely known. Such a man appeared to be Henry George. Just how he became -interested and entered the political field of labor is not known in detail. The authorship of the first suggestion to invite Henry George to become the Labor candidate for mayor is claimed by a newspaper man, Thomas W. Jackson. In an article in the New Tork Evening Mail, June 12, 1911, he speaks of attending in the ^New York Times, Aug. 20, 18S6, p. 3. » lUd. [310] SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT summer of 1886 a gathering of labor unionists and labor report- ers at the cooperative hat store in New York of a strikers ' factory in Connecticut. At this gathering he suggested Henry George as the Labor candidate for mayor. On the 20th of August, Mr. George was asked by the secretary of the Committee on Permanent Organization, Mr. Archibald, if he would accept the Labor nomination for mayor. Mr. George consulted his friends, and among others Mr. Louis F. Post, to whom he said that he would not run unless he could get at least 30,000 votes. At the meeting of the conference on the 26th of August, Me- Mackin presided and Archibald acted as secretary. The latter had received from Henry George a letter in which he said that he would accept the nomination upon the one condition : ' ' That at least 30,000 citizens should, over their signatures, express the wish that I should become a candidate, and pledge themselves in such case to go to the polls and vote for me. ' '* This statement was accompanied by his views on the singletax, and by some sharp critical remarks on existing conditions. The letter was received by the conference with enthusiasm. There was not much discussion. It was decided to circulate copies of the letter and to start a canvass from shop to shop and from house to house gathering signatures to a pledge in accord- ance with the terms of the letter. The Com.mittee on Platform made a preliminary report. Some suggestions along the line of labor demands were made by several delegates, and the platform was returned to the Com- mittee for further development. The next meeting of the Con- ference was held in Clarendon Hall on September 2. Mr. Mc- Mackin made a speech in favor of the candidacy of Henry George which was met with enthusiasm by the delegates, but on the can- didacy nothing was decided definitely. The proposed assessment of the delegates one dollar each and of the union members 25 cents each, to help along the cause of independent political ac- tion, was positively decided. These were the first steps whereby Henry George came into the labor movement, or, more correctly speaking, into the politi- * Appendix I. 5 [ 311 ] 66 BUL1.ETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN cal phase of this movement. He was welcomed by organized la- bor for several reasons: His popularity as a powerful writer, especially the influence of his Progress and Poverty; his keen interest in and agitation for the Irish cause and the Irish land reform ; his singletax theory based upon the land problem — the problem which had played so important a part in the movement of the masses in America ; the fact that he was not affiliated with any current faction; and his good reputation. To think that the main cause was his singletax theory, as such, would be erro- neous. The singletax as a general reform scheme was not fa- miliar to and was not even understood by the working people. Then again, it would be superficial to think that Henry George was made a standard bearer of labor mainly because he himself had been a wage-earner and closely connected with the trade un- ion movement. He had been a wage-earner, but at this time he was an employer of labor. His relations to the trade union move- ment were, in general, indifferent. He saw in the political up- rising of labor only an opportunity to bring his singletax theory into practical politics; otherwise he was ilot interested in the labor movement, and its nature, meaning and extent he did not even fully comprehend. As we have seen, he became the stand- ard bearer of organized labor not because of any active desire of his own, and not so much in consequence of an invitation initi- ) ated by the rank and file of organized labor, as in obedience to the call of some representatives of middle class people, mostly in liberal professions and converted to the singletax cause. These were radicals, who sympathized with the labor movement and had always had some influence upon it. Henry George's can- didacy was rather an accident than an organic outcome of the labor movement itself. The Singletax Made the Isstxe The members of the Central Labor Union of New York rep- resented the majority of the delegates to the Labor Conference. Almost every important move at the meetings of the Conference, usually held on Thursdays, was previously discussed and decided upon at the Sunday meetings of the Central Labor Union. The above-mentioned political platform of labor, based mainly upon [312] SPBEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 67 labor demands, was a joint product of the Central Labor Union and of the Conference. But this platform, after the discussion on August 26, came up no more at the Conference meetings. In- stead a new platform was substituted. This was written by Henry George,^ in consultation with the Committee on Platform of the Conference and other leaders in the movement. The singletax was made its main issue. ^ The next meeting of the Conference, at which this platform was accepted and Henry George nominated, was held September 23, at Clarendon HaU ; 175 labor organizations were represented, by 409 delegates. When the meeting was called to order, Frank Farrell, chairman of the Committee on Platform, read the new platform to the conference. It was as follows : "The delegates of the trade and lahor organizations of New York, in conference assembled, make this declaration: "1. Holding that the corruptions of government and the impover- ishment of labor result from neglect of the self-evident truths pro- claimed by the founders of this Republic that all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights, we aim at the abolition of the system which compels men to pay their fellow-creatures for the use of God's gifts to all, and permits monopo- lizers to deprive labor of natural opportunities for employment, thus filling the land with tramps and paupers, and bringing about an un- natural competition which tends to reduce wages to starvation rates and to make the wealth producer the industrial slave of those who grow rich by his toll.- "2. Holding, moreover, that the advantages arising from social growth and Improvement belong to society at large, we aim at the abolition of the system which makes such beneficent Inventions as the railroad and telegraph a means for the oppression of the people, and the aggrandizement of an aristocracy of wealth and power. We declare the true purpose of government to be the maintenance of that sacred right of property which gives to everyone opportunity to em- ploy his labor and security that he shall enjoy its fruits; to prevent the strong from oppressing the weak, and the unscrupulous from robbing the honest; and to do for the equal benefit of all such things as can be better done by organized society than by individuals; and ' we aim at the abolition of all laws which give to any class of citi- zens advantages, either judicial, financial, industrial, or political, that are not equally shared by all others. "3. We further declare that the people of New York City should IUd., pp. 129-132. ''Ibid., p. 133. [331] 86 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN This letter was circulated in front of Catholic churches and among Catholic worshippers on their return from service. The Tammany Hall press and politicians saw to it that the letter was made very widely known. Its sole purpose was to support the Tammany people as against the efforts of organized labor and their candidate, Henry George. The conflict between Henry George and the Catholic Church afterwards grew much wider, as we shall see in the next chapter. Labor Meetings and Speeches of Henry George The mass meetings organized by labor organizations and their leaders for campaigning purposes differed in character and size from those of the other parties. They were numerous and usu- ally large. Most of them were held in the open air, usually on the street corners. From the system by which one speaker fol- lowed another, speaking at several meeting places in a night, the labor campaign got its nickname of the "tail-board-campaign." The common people, women and men, gathered in hundreds and often in thousands around a place from which the shifting speak- ers addressed the crowd. This was a real educational campaign. Labor conditions, po- litical corruption, democracy, singletax and other such topics were widely discussed. After every address some questions were put by the listeners and answered by the speaker. After his ac- ceptance speech, Henry George delivered his first campaign speech before a densely packed mass meeting at Chickering Hall, October 22. He explained at length his singletax theory and ex- isting conditions under the private ownership of land. In ref- erence to the latter he stated: "Here is the primary injustice — the root of all that is evil in what is commonly called the conflict between labor and capital. "^^ But if the singletax should be realized then it would "more than anything else, promote gen- eral prosperity, raise wages, and bring about a condition of gen- eral comfort. ' "^ After this lengthy and eloquent speech the list- eners asked some questions. Upon the question what had the theories of Henry George to do with the campaign, the latter M/6id., p. 79. [ 332 ] SPBBK — SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMBISCT 87 answered : ' ' They have this to do with the campaign : Mr. He- witt says that I ought to be beaten on account of my theories — that I am a mere theorist. My election will forward those the- ories simply by increasing the discussion on them. ' '^^ Among the campaign stories manufactured by the United Democracy against Henry George during the last few days of the campaign was one to the effect that T. V. Powderly, then the General Master Workman of the Knights of Labor, was op- posed to the election of Henry George. At the beginning of the campaign, and also at this time his absence was easily explained as an indication of his opposition to Henry George. When this rumor reached Mr. Powderly he immediately telegraphed to his friends in New York to call a mass-meeting, which he wanted to address. This meeting was called on the eve of the election of November 1. Mr. Powderly spoke very favorably for the inde- pendent political action, condemned political corruption, and strongly indorsed the candidacy of Henry George. "Vote early tomorrow morning for yourself, your family, your country, and your God, in the person of Henry George. ' '^* The Election and Voters Election day was the second of November. In round numbers the votes cast were as follows: For Mr. Hewitt 90,000, for Henry George 68,000, and for Mr. Eoosevelt 60,000. There were many reports that Henry George won the election but was counted out, and that numbers of voters were bought by the Tammany people. Be this as it may, the main interest lies in the question, who, of what social position, were those sixty- eight thousand voters who stood for the labor candidate in the election? There is no doubt that the vast majority of them were members of labor .organizations, wage earners, and that a com- paratively small number were men of liberal profession and a yet smaller number were radical merchants and manufacturers. It was really a political movement of organized labor — a class movement in its nature, helped along by a small number of out- • side sympathizers. "Ibid., p. 88. ^IMd., p. 120. [ 333 ] 88 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN Although the campaign did not end in formal victory, the un- expectedly large labor vote created enthusiasm, confidence in the united and organized efforts by labor and -bright hope for the future. It was a remarkable and even a unique campaign in the history of American politics. In a short period of time, without money, press influence, and proper political organiza- tion, to unite diverse elements, diverse not only as regards occu- pation, nationality, culture and language, but also philosophies and political belief, and nearly to defeat, in a clean and honest way, both rich and powerful old parties headed by trained poli- ticians — ^was not such a campaign record-making? And truly previous to the campaign of 1886 and after it, till our time, there has not been in American municipal elections such a political campaign undertaken by organized labor, united into one body and one effort, except, it may be, the more recent Milwaukee and Los Angeles campaigns where labor fought under the leadership of the Socialists. The success of the campaign in 1886 is explained by the exist- ing industrial, political and legal conditions — by the crying need that labor should better oppressive conditions, by the unifying educational work done by the Central Labor Union in the previ- ous years, and by the popular and powerful leadership of Henry George, whose non-partisan attitude created a possibility for di- verse elements to unite under his leadership. A union creates feeling of solidarity, self-confidence, and a hope for success, and this psychological factor is one of prime importance in mass movements. The success of the campaign also had purely prac- tical beneficial results. A change in the attitude of the parties in power toward the demands for better labor laws took place after the campaign. If one compares the spirit and purpose of the labor laws enacted in the previous four or five years with the spirit and purpose enacted in 1887, one finds a marked dif- ference. While the former laws meant a "grand legal round- up" of labor, the laws of 1887 were, though vaguely, directly to protect labor. For instance, there was enacted at Albany, in 1887, a law proAdding for adjustment of disputes between em- ployers and employees and authorizing the creation of Boards of Mediation and Arbitration. Besides, there was enacted in 1887 a law for tenement house regulation, a law providing for the la- [334] SPEEK— SINGL.BTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 89 beling and marketing of convict-made goods, a perfected me- chanics' lien law, a law regulating employment of women and children, a law regidating the hours of labor on street, surface and elevated railroads, and finally the notorious Penal Code was amended by a law prohibiting employers, singly or combined, to coerce employees not to join a labor organization.'" Undoubtedly such a change in the attitude of the lawmakers was, at least in part, due to the impressive labor strength demon- strated in the campaign of 1886. The leaders of the campaign derived great encouragement from its successful results, and soon after the campaign they began to build up a permanent political organization, preparing for the next national campaign. ^ Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of Statistic* of Labor of the State of New York, 1887, pp. 736-776. [335] 90 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN CHAPTER VII BUILDING UP THE UNITED LABOR PARTY Central Organizations The Central Labor Union Campaign Committee met on No- vember 4 and discussed plans for a permanent political organiza- tion of labor. It was decided to caU a meeting of the district organizers on November 9, at which a date was to be set for a primary election of delegates to a county convention. The -political leaders of the campaign, closest to Henry George, called a mass meeting at Cooper Union on November 6. In the call no counsel was taken of the trades, either collectively or individually. At this meeting was adopted a resolution i)repared by Henry George and presented by Rev. John W. Kramer, in which it was proposed to name the new political organization the "Progres- sive Democracy, ' ' and which ran, in part, as follows : "Since the Republican party had outlived the days of its usefulness and the Democratic party was become but a corrupt machine .... we hereby declare that time has come for an organization which shall be in the true sense Republican and in the true sense Democratic — of a real party of the people, of a Progressive Democracy which shall revive and carry out the principles of Thomas Jefferson .... We call upon the Central Labor Union to which is due the credit of taking the initiative in this great movement, to issue an address to organized workingmen of other cities, looking to cooperation by simi- lar movements In their own localities.'" This resolution called upon all who held the principles of the Clarendon Hall platform : "To form themselves throughout the whole country into associations for the purpose of carrying on the work of propagating truth by means i Public, Nov. 3, 1911, p. 1130. [ 336 ] SPEBK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT ' 91 of lectures, discussions, and the dissemination of literature so that the way may be prepared for political action in their various localities and for the formal organization at the proper time of a national party."^ A temporary central committee of three, consisting of John McMackin, Father Edward McGlynn, and Professor David B. Scott, was appointed to carry out the organization work. This committee chose G. Barnes, a publishing agent, as the executive secretary, in preference to Daniel De Leon, who was another candidate for that position. McMacMn was the only labor repre- sentative in the Central Committee. After the first meeting, Professor Scott retired on account of ill health and James Red- path, managing editor of the North American Review, took his place. Barnes in the capacity of executive secretary, on his own motion, changed the name of the organization from the "Pro- gressive Democracy" to that of the "Land and Labor Commit- tee."^ The initiation of this meeting, the method of the call, and the character of the appointments, attracted the attention of some of the labor leaders, especially of the Socialists, who considered the meeting as the beginning of the "side-tracking" of the labor movement. The Leader said aiterwards: "At this point began the work of side-tracking the movement from the whole issue of Labor to the one question of a single land tax. ' '* The Socialists even went so far as to explain the appointment of Barnes, a pub- lishing agent, to the ofSee of executive secretary by personal in- terests of Henry George. According to the Leader: "An ex- tensive system of advertising the George books accompanied and was part of the appeals issued by the Cooper Union Commit- tee. "° Apparently this was done not for the material interests of Henry George but for the sake of principles advocated in his books. Though there was much talk about the meeting and its re- ' The Leader, Nov. 8, 1887, p. 3. The Central Labor Union at once Issued a call to organized labor throughout the United States asking it to form political associations preliminary to the national convention of th* new party. — Standard, Jan. 8, 1887, p. 7. 'Leader, Oct. 30, 1887, p. 6. * Leader, Oct. 30, 1887, p. 6. » Ibid. [337] 92 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN suits in labor circles, no open criticism or protest was made at that time. The people were enthusiastic and everything went on smoothly. The new central organization continued its work, especially in organizing land and labor clubs. It also worked out a constitution and by-laws, which were adopted on December 1, 1886, and which remained in force until the county convention on January 6, 1887." The Laws Committee of the Central Labor Union was repo^nized as the Laws Committee of the United La- bor party at the same time. This committee worked out the "provisions of the Constitutional Convention and other measures of importance to the workingmen and the party of United La- bor."^ Local Organizations According to the call of the Political Committee of the Central Labor Union, the district organizers met on November 9 at Cen- tral Labor Union Hall. The meeting did not favor the name of "Progressive Democracy." The motion made by Barnes to name the new organization the "Land and Labor Party" was defeated, and the name "United Labor" was adopted. At the same time it was decided to call a county convention on January 13, 1887, in which each assembly was to be represented by one delegate for each 200 votes cast on November 2, altogether 340 delegates. Meanwhile, each assembly district was to be reorgan- ized. The call for a county convention was issued and after that the reorganization of districts and election of delegates went on energetically. Two kinds of local organizations were formed: (1) District Associations of the United Labor Party, and (2) Land and La- bor Clubs. Both considered themselves belonging to the United Labor party and in harmony with the Clarendon Hall Platform, but they differed as to their constituents and constitution. The Land and Labor Clubs were organized upon the initiative and- with the help of the committee of three, elected at the Cooper Union meeting. Secretary Barnes especially agitated for those clubs. They were distinctly singletax clubs with a membership • Appendix II. 'Appendix III. [338] SPBEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 93 composed of mixed elements imder the leadership of intellectuals. On the other hand, the district associations grew up spontan- eously from the temporary election organizations under the lead- ership of district organizers, mostly labor leaders. The majority of their constituents were wage-earners. Thus began the separation of the political or party organiza- tion from the economic or trade organization of labor, and, fur- thermore, two different types of local organizations of the party appeared. The County Convention met on January 6, 1887, in Clarendon Hall. All 340 delegates were present. McMackin was elected chairman, Frank Ferrell vice-chairman, and J. P. Archibald secretary. The election of the committees on constitution and organiza- tion ended the work of the first session of the convention, in which participated almost all the prominent reformers and lead- ers representing different political beliefs and schools of thought at that time. A report of the Leader described some of them in the following way: "Honorable Oideon J. Tucker — a delegate from the 16tli Assembly District; W. Lloyd, old, graybearded Greenback veteran, as a spectator from tbe platform, among the host of the younger crusaders In the holy war with oppression and corruption, was a sight full of inspira- tion; Jeremiah Murphy — the erstwhile prominent president of the freight-handlers in their palmy days; James Magie — the rising leader of the Empire Protective Association; William McCabe — the war-horse of other-day labor politics; Phil. Scandell — whose prominence and val- uable services in K. of L. work a couple of years ago were still fresh in the minds of most of these there last night; Henry Emrich — the Furniture-Workers' National Secretary and one of the Central Labor Union permanent pillars; B. J. HawTces — a trade unionist of experi- ence of both sides of the ocean and the present trusty treasurer of the County Organization; Joseph Wilkinson — ^th© veteran secretary of the Journeymen Tailors; George K. Lloyd — who helped to rock the Central Labor Union in its cradle; Wm. Conclin — painter, one of the solid timbers of the 15th A. D.; Wm. Wallace — chairman of the "tony" sev- enth, and a strong link in 49's (K. of L.) long chain; editor J. W. Sul- livan — one of the best-posted men present on labor history, political economy, and social statics; S. Sanial — chairman of the 24th A. D., a veteran labor journalist; Patrick Doody — one of the best known and most sterling champions of every honest reform; Thomas Moran — the [339] 94 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN most sagacious and finished debater of the Excelsior Labor Club; Ch. M. Maxwell — a respected president of the Omulet Association, touched elbows and grasped hands in last night's remarkable ensemble of fraternity."' The second session of the county convention was held on Jan- uary 13 in Clarendon Hall. The committee on permanent or- ganization was elected as follows : John McMackin as chairman, Frank FerreU as first vice-chairman, Henry Bmrich as second vice-chairman, A. G. Johnson as first secretary, and Dr. Wm. Gottheil as second secretary. The proposal to name the new party the "Land and Labor Party" was defeated, leaving the name of the party unsettled till the next session. The temporary central committee formed at the Cooper Union meeting remained in existence. It bore the name of Land and Labor Committee and was mainly in charge of the above-men- tioned clubs. Thus were formed not only two types of local or- ganizations, but also two parallel central C9mmittees in the same party. This duality of organization was due, first, to the con- scious intention of the leaders closest to Henry George, to sep- arate entirely the new party from labor organizations, and, sec- ond, to the existence of a non-labor element in the party. Henry George and his followers wanted to organize every "honest cit- izen" who accepted their principles. As the radical intellectuals and merchants and other capitalists who "worked by their heads" did not belong to organized labor, they, accepting the singletax theory, joined the clubs more readily than the ordinary district associations in which the wage-earner element prevailed. The Land and Labor Clubs, being free from class distinction and having the singletax for their main issue, were especially favored by the Standard. Henry George, urging their formation, said : "In every state headquarters will be opened for the formation of Land and Labor Clubs . . . Land and Labor Clubs are organiz- ing about thirty a week .... When a suflScient number of these clubs have been organized to allow a full representation in all sections of the country, a national convention will be called .... The con- vention will choose the name of the party, will make a platform, and will decide whether to nominate or not."" ^Leader, Jan. 7, 1887, p. 1. » Standard, Jan. 15, 1887, p. 3. [340] SPEEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 96 The third and last session, of the county convention was held on January 20. The main business of this session was the dis- cussion and adoption of a platform, rules and regulations for the new party. The committee on platform, through its chair- man. Professor Daniel De Leon, introduced a resolution which was adopted. It reaffirmed the Clarendon Hg-ll Platform, em- phasized currency reform more emphatically, made a consider- able concession to the Socialists and unionists, calling the whole economic system "perverse", depriving "the man of his birth right (land)" and robbing "the producer of a. large share of the fruits of his labor. ' '^^ On the recommendation of the same resolution the name of the United Labor party was adopted. This name was not favored by Henry George and his followers, because it stamped the move- ment with a class characteristic. They agreed, however, to ac- cept it temporarily. An investigation made by the New Yoi'k TolkszeHtung showed that out of the 340 delegates to the county convention, 320 were wage-earners and only 20 belonged to other industrial classes. Quoting the VolJcszeitung, the Standard said : ' ' In view of this statement the name that was adopted last week, ' The United Labor Party, ' seems well chosen. ' '^^ The new party organization consisted of: Election district organizations, assembly district organizations, assembly execu- tive committee, a county general committee, and a county execu- tive committee. In the proposed constitiition were the following clauses: "No resident of an Election District shall be eligible to membersbip of the corresponding Election District Organization unless .v. . . lie has severed all connection with all other political parties, organiza- tions and clubs." Art. I. Sec. 2." Further is the statement — "The County General Committee shall have the power to amend or alter this constitution subject to a general vote of the Assembly D. Or- ganization" . . . Art. iv, Sec. 4.^= ^ standard, Jan. 22, 1887, p. 6. ^^ Standard, Jan. 22, 1887, p. 6. ^'Leader, Jan. 22, 1887, p. 3, col. 2. " lUd. [ 341 ] 96 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN , And still further — "Twenty-second Ass. D. Organization shall In view of its exceptional circumstances, be authorized to create an advisory board on which the various nationalities shall be represented in proportion to the number of enrolled members in the club of each nationality" .... Art. VI, Sec. 2." Thus the permanent county organization of the United Labor party was completed. It remained only to develop it. The process of organizing locals and educating the masses went on smoothly. Aside from New York County, local organizations of the party were formed in Kings (Brooklyn), Albany, Erie (Buffalo), and other counties in the state. Small Land and La- bor Clubs, though many of them existed only on paper, appeared here and there. In the city oi New York alone, fifteen such clubs were organized.^^ On May 5, 1887, a call for a state convention of the United Labor party to be held at the city of Syracuse on August 17, was issued. This call was signed by the members of the committee on state convention, of the general committee. United Labor party. Kings County; of the committee on state convention of the general committee. United Labor party. New York County; and of the general committee Land and Labor. The representa- tion was to be : Three delegates and three alternates from each assembly district, and one delegate from each Land and Labor club in districts not regularly organized. In the call, prepared mainly by Henry George, the following issues were set forth: (1) The taxation of land values ; (2) Demand for currency re- form in the spirit of Greenbackism ; (3) Government ownership of railroads and telegraphs, the private ownership of which "while failing adequately to supply public needs, impoverishes the farmer, oppresses the manufacturer, hampers the merchants ' '^* The caU ended with a condemnation of the Demo- cratic and Eepublican parties as "hopelessly and shamelessly corrupt" and affiliated with monopolies. Labor demands were entirely omitted from the call ; it avoided class distinctions and appealed to all the people, except landlords and millionaires. '^heaAer, May 6, 1887, p. 1. "ieoder. May 5, 1887, p. 1. [342] SPBEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 97 The dissatisfaction with the general attitude of Henry George and his followers toward the movement became more intense among the Socialists. The Leader, describing this history of the , movement afterwards said: "The call for a state convention (Syracuse, Aug. 17, 1887) was mainly framed by Mr. George and proved to be a very skillful rhetorical evasion of the main issue between capital aijd labor upon which or- ganized labor stands. The rupture grew. Mr. George for the first time took a serious interest in the party which he had captured for his plans and policy . . . ."" The Socialists began to feel that the philosophy of the Single- taxers was not a "partial socialism" it all but something op- posite, out of harmony altogether with, the Socialist doctrines. Neither did the tactics of the Singletaxers appeal to the Social- ists. The Singletaxers denied that there was any real conflict of interests between labor and capital, and that the movement in its nature was a class movement of labor. There was also a practical rea,son why the Singletaxers opposed the Socialists, their doctrines and tactics. It was explained by Henry George in an interview with the editor of the Leader be- fore the Syracuse convention. During this interview, Henry George expressed his "highest esteem for the personal character, the self-sacrifice and the honesty of purpose of the Socialists, but said, on the other hand, that in order not to frighten away the country votes, the party ought to disclaim all connections with 'Socialistic doctrines."^* Furthermore, Henry George com- plained that the Socialists were continuously attacking the sin- gletax theory, trying to impress their own views upon the new party. Not long before the Syracuse convention the Standard reported Henry George as saying : "The Socialists .... have been persistent in the attempt to undermine the platform of the party .... 'We insist,' they say, 'that the burning social question is not a land tax but the abolition of all private property in the instruments of production . . . .' Very well, then .... there is no place for them in the new party."" '^'Leader, Oct. 30, 1887, p. 6. ''Leader, Aug. 17, 1887, p. 1. ^Standard, Aug. 13, 1887. p. 1. [343] 98 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN Thus arose the contest of supremacy in the political labor movement. Each of the rival schools honestly and sincerely be- lieved in the all-curing power of its doctrines and methods and tried to capture labor by means of agitation, education, and or- ganization. The Stngletaxers, however, had two advantages. First, they already had established themselves in the movement, and second, they had a strong popular leader, which the Social- ists lacked. The main advantage of the latter consisted of their compact organization and unity of action. In the beginning of this struggle the Singletaxers were put on the defensive. It was only somewhat later that they decided to become aggressive. The other schools in the movement had no ambition to capture it. Greenbackism was declining, while the Knights of Labor and Trade-Unionists, having their own organizations for their own ends, did not care much to enforce any definite philosophy or policy of their own upon the new political party, except that they were quite firm in the immediate labor demands. So the struggle began between the Singletaxers and the Socialists. Capture of the Leader by the Socialists The Leader was the recognized organ of the Central Labor Un- ion and the United Labor party, being edited from its beginning and during the political campaign of the fall of 1886 in the spirit of the singletax and Henry George's policy, the member- ship of its editorial staff being his followers and Louis F. Post its editor-in-chief. Shortly after the fall campaign the Socialists at a general meeting of the shareholders of the Leader received a large majority of votes and elected Sergius E. Shevich, a So- cialist and former editor of the Volkszeitung, to the position of editor-in-chief of the Leader.^" This apparently sudden victory " S. B. Shevich was a. Russian nobleman employed in . the diplomatic service. He became a follower of Ferdinand Lassalle in Germany, and was forced to leave not only his diplomatic position but his native coun- try. At the end of the seventies he migrated to the United States and began to take active part in the Socialist movement. He was a well-read man, spoke several languages and possessed oratorical abilities. He was one of those who were instrumental in bringing about, in the middle eighties, a change In the tactics of the Socialist Labor party — from inde- pendent politi'cal action to educational methods. [344] SPEEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 99 of the Socialists may be explained, first, by the fact that the Leader was supported chiefly by the radical, especially German element, and, second, the Socialists and their sympathizers had foresightedly distributed their shares more extensively among themselves, which meant more votes in their favor at the gen- eral meetings of the company, for the voting was exercised upon the principle of one man, one vote, irrespective of the number of shares held. The total number of the shares was 900. Out of this amount only 300^^ shares were owned by the Socialists. The majority of the remaining 600 shares were owned by the Central Labor Union and other individual unions. A considerable num- ber of shares belonged also to the Greenbackers, the Singletaxers, and individuals not affiliated with any specific organization or school of thought. At first the new editor did not attack the singletax theory di- rectly. Indirectly, however, he criticized it, emphasizing the la- bor side of the movement and publishing articles on class con- flict which were out of harmony with the singletax theory. At the general meeting of the shareholders of the Leader Com- pany on March 5, 1887, S. B. Shevich was reelected and John McMaekin and James P. Archibald were respectively chosen chairman and treasurer of the company for the next year.^^ When the conflict between the Singletaxers and the Socialists in the locals of the party became acute, the Leader took open stand against the theory and tactics of the Singletaxers. On June 23, the Leader commented editorially on the question of the future policies to be followed by the United Labor party : Res- toration of land to the people, just remuneration of the toilers for their labor, the shortening of the hours of labor, the public ownership of the means of transportation and communication were advocated. The Leader stated also that there existed a con- flict between capital and labor, taking both in the sense of in- dustrial classes and calling those "fools" and "knaves" who de- nied the existence of the conflict.^^ The editorial of the next day stated "that the 'theory' known as the 'Henry George's' had '^New York World, Sept. 8, 1887, p. 2. ''Standard, March 12, 1887, p. 3. '^^ Leader, June 23, 1887, p. 2. [345] 100 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN been promulgated by John Stuart Mill."^* Then followed a quo- tation from the chapter on taxation in Mill's Elements of Polit- ical Economy, in which Mill advocates the taxation of "unearned appendage." Criticizing Mill, the editorial concluded: "We suggest to the boodle press that before attacking Henry George it would be well to pulverize John Stuart Mill."^° In another editorial the Leader criticized the Physiocrats and showed that they had arrived at the same conclusion that Henry George reached afterwards.^' ' In consequence of this attack upon the singletax theory by the Leader, McMackin, chairman of the Leader Company resigned in the beginning of August. ^^ Thus even the business management of the Leader went into the hands of the Socialists. Their control over the party's organ was now complete. The Standard Almost as an answer to the capture of the Leader by the So- cialists came, at the end of November, 1886, the announcement by Henry George of his intention to start a weekly paper of his own under the title of the Standard, the first copy of which ac- tually appeared on January 8, 1887. Its editorial staff was as follows: Henry George, proprietor and editor-in-chief; Wil- liam T. Croasdale, managing editor ; Louis F. Post, editorial and special writer; Rev. John W. Kramer; J. W. Sullivan, labor editor ; W. B. Scott ; and Henry George, Jr. In his introductory statement Henry George said that he hoped to make this paper the worthy exponent and advocate, of a great party yet unnamed that was to be formed."* The paper was carefuUy edited. Much space in it was given to the contro- versy with the Catholic Church, to the McGlynn case, to the ex- planation of the singletax theory, and to the agitation in favor of the United Labor party. Thus each side had its own organ: The Socialists had the "Leader, June 24, 1887, p. 2. = Ibid. "Leader, July 14, 1887, p. 2. "Standard. Aug. 13, 1887, p. 1. *« Standard, Jan. 8, 1887, p. 1. [346] SPBBK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT . 101 Leader, and the Singletaxers the Standard, both papers being the organs of the party. The Development of the Conflict with the Authorities op THE Catholic Church The success of the political campaign of organized labor, headed by Henry George opposing the private ownership in land values, greatly alarmed the authorities of the Catholic church. Archbishop Corrigan issued a pastoral letter which was read in the Ca,tholic churches and published in the newspapers on Nov. 21, 1886. It was mainly directed against the political uprising of labor, and against the singletax doctrines, although this was not openly stated in the letter. The archbishop de- fended private property in land as being in accordance with God's laws and economic necessities. For the benefit of the poor he advocated charity and recalled that Christ proclaimed "the poor blessed," and bade "them hope for the reward of eternal happiness . . . Now, who does not see that this' is the best way of settling the struggle of long standing between the poor and the rich."^' A criticisiri of this letter was made by Fr. McGljmn in an in- terview with a reporter of the New York Tribune. For this criticism the archbishop suspended McGlynn for the remaindei^ of the year and sent a letter to the Cardinal Prefect of the Prop- aganda, laying the case before him. Soon after, McGlynn was ordered to proceed to Rome. However, he refused to obey this order on account of ill health (he had heart trouble) reaffirming his adherence to the singletax doctrines: "I would bring about instantly, if I could, such change of laws all the world over as would confiscate private property in land, without one penny of compensation to the miscalled owners."^" As an answer to this, the archbishop suspended McGlynn until such time as the high- est authority of the Catholic Church should act. On September 29, 1886, Henry George made a personal visit to the archbishop to vindicate McGlynn, having an introductory ^ George-Hewitt Campaign, Louis F. Post and Fred C. Leubuscher, Nei» York, 1886, 139. "Standard, Feb. 5, 1887. [347] 102 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN letter from the latter in which he said: "It seems to me a provi- dential occurrence for which we should be thankful, that the labor organizations have chosen for their leader so wise and con- servative a man, and one so utterly opposed, as all his writings show, to Socialism, communism and anarchy, as Mr. George is. ' '^^ The visit was a short and a most formal one. It did not ac- complish its purpose. On the next day Henry George wrote a private letter to the bishop in which he stated that the hostility of the church authorities ' ' could but give point to the assertions of those who are striving to alienate workingmen from the church, by declaring that its authorities have always exerted their power against any attempt to emancipate labor. ' '^^ In answer to the pastoral letter of the archbishop of Novem- ber 21, 1886, Henry George published an open letter on Decem- ber 7, 1886, in which he stated that the pastoral letter places the Catholic Church "in the attitude of a champion of private prop- erty in land."^^ Then he defended his singletax theory on the same grounds on which the archbishop attacked it, that is, God's law and natural laws. When McGlynn was ordered to Eome, Henry George published a strong article in the first issue of the Standard in which he vigorously attacked the actions of the Catholic Church.'* This article created a sensation and two extra editions of the Siamd- ard, in all 75,000 copies, were issued. From now on Henry George gave a large space in the Standard to the conflict with the Catholic Church, which grew to international importance. In the next issue of the Standard he wrote : "It is notorious that in New York the Catholic church has a long series of years been more or less allied with Tammany, and that this influence, for. which a quid pro quo has been paid by grants of public property and lavish appropriations of public money .... And this is significant, that Archbishop Corrlgan had no objections to Dr. McGlynn making any number of speeches for a candidate by Tam- many.'"" '^Standard, Jan. 8, 1887, p. 1. =2 md. ™ George-Hewitt Campaign, 140. ^Standard, Jan. 8, 1887, p. 1. ^ Standard, Jan. 15, 1887, p. 1. McGlynn made speeches In behalf of the candidacy of Cleveland, 1882; no objections to his speeches were made by the church authorities. [348] SPEEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 103 The newspapers of the old parties approved of the archbishop 's action when he, in the middle of January, removed McGlynn from his pastorate. Even many Protestant Church authorities, actually in conflict with those of the Catholic Church, took the side of the latter in the conflict. At the beginning of May, Cardinal Simeoni summoned Mc- Glynn to Eome, giving him forty days to go, under pain of ex- commxinication. As McGlynn could not obey this order, he was excommunicated from the Catholic Church by Archbishop Cor- rigan on July 3, 1887. Anti-Poveety Society At the end of March, McGlynn addressed a very large audi- ence, composed mainly of Catholics and his former parishioners, in the Academy of Music, on the theme of "The Cross of the New Crusade" against poverty. This address was repeated by him at various times and places, even outside of New York. At the end of April he addressed the Brooklyn people. Describing this meeting, Henry George wrote : "On last Wednesday it was Brooklyn's turn to do honor to Rev. McGlynn. A big audience collected in the Academy of Music to hear the famous divine de- • liver his lecture on The Cross of the New Crusade . . . "^' The beginning of these lectures of McGlynn coincided with the creation of an organization known as the Anti-Poverty So- ciety, the idea of which was originated by Thomas McCready of the Standard staff. A militant society to fight poverty, to arouse the New York slums in the tenement sections by educating the masses to the idea of the singletax, was to be formed. On March 26, 1887, a small meeting took place in the office of the Standard at which the first organization under the name of the Anti-Poverty Society suggested by McCready was called into life. McGljmn was appointed president; Henry George, vice president; Benjamin Urner, a merchant, treasurer; and M. Clark, a member of the editorial staff of the Irish World, sec- retary. The first formal meeting of the new society was called on May 1 in Chickering Hall. The attendance at this meeting was so ^Standm-d, Apr. 30, 1887, p. 1. [349] 104 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN large that many people had to be turned away. The chief speak- ers were McGlynn and Henry George. The latter said in part: "The simple words, 'Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as It is in hisaven,' as they fell from the lips of a Christian priest who proclaims the common fatherhood of God and the coramon brotherhood of man .... have in them the power with which Christianity con- quered the world . . . ."" The enrollment of the members for the new society was large. Women and men of various religious denominations and walks of life joined the society. Everyone signed a card on which the object of the society was printed and paid an entrance fee of one dollar. Most of the Socialists kept away from the society on account of its religious spirit. A considerable number of Mc- Glynn 's former parishioners, mostly Irish wage-earners, joined the Anti-Poverty Society, which served as a good propaganda organization for the singletax theory among the masses and thereby helped along the general movement. The Conflict over the Term "Labor" in the Party's Name Although the county convention adopted the name of the United Labor party and Henry George and his followers half- heartedly agreed to it for the time being, they were always dis- satisfied with this name and at no time, dtiring the whole career of the party, did they succeed in getting rid of it. The Standwrd opened its pages for the discussion on the party's name. Henry George favored the name of either Free Soil or Free Land party.'* He rejected the term "labor," because "it has narrow associations and would handicap the new party with the notion that it is merely a class movement. ' '^" At the same time the la- bor unionists and especially the Socialists vigorously defended the adopted name of the United Labor party and particularly the term Labor in it. The Leader said: "In the word 'Labor' are crystallized the noblest aspirations, the grandest and broad- est ideas of our century. ' '*" The followers of Henry . George '■'Standard, May 7, 1887. p. 2. ^Standard, June 18, 1887. "Standard, July 30, 1887, p. 1. *> Leader, July 30, 1887, p. 2. [350] SPBEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 105 suggested many different names for the party. For example: Anti-Monopolists, Nationalists, Federalists, Christian, the Peo- ple's Eights, Anti-Poverty, etc. At the end of 1887 Henry George wrote again : "It was said over and over again during the campaigning (The state campaign of 1887) that the United Labor party Is not a 'labor' party In the ordinary meaning of the term. It has no more claim on the votes of the wage-earners, than on those of the farmers or any other class of people."" Henry George continued to favor the name of the Free Soil party. McGlynn favored the title of the Commonwealth party. This outspoken opposition of the Singletaxers to the term "la- bor" in the party's name gave their opponents, the Socialists, a strong argument in attacking the Singletaxers for "side-track- ing" the labor movement. The Singletaxers themselves hardly gained anything by it; they were not in position to shift the movement from the organized labor to that of all classes of the people as they wished and hoped. Developments in the Central Organizations The central organizations of the party at the beginning of July, 1887, consisted of the county general committee, of which McMackin was chairman. It met at Clarendon Hall on the first Thursday of each month. The county executive committee had a room at 28 Cooper Un- ion and was composed of twenty-four members, one from each assembly district. John McMackin was chairman. The election of delegates to the state convention in the assem- bly districts began in the month of July. Here and there ap- peared instructions to the delegates to defend the term "labor" in the party's name, to emphasize "labor demands" in the plat- form, to nominate a "straight labor ticket," etc. The Single- taxers attributed such instructions to the influence of the Social- ists. To a certain degree this was true. In the middle of July rumors that the Socialists would be ousted from the United La- bor party on the ground that they belonged to another political " Standardj Dec. 3, 1887, p, 1. [351] 106 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN party, namely, the Socialist Labor party, began to circulate. At the same time conflicts between the Singletaxers and the Social- ists in several of the assembly districts, especially in the tenth, began. The Socialists insisted that the County Executive Com- mittee issue a ruling on the eligibility of the Socialists for mem- bership in the United Labor party. On July 24 the Committee met and passed unanimously the following resolution : "Resolved, that it is the sense of the County Executive Committee that membership in the Socialist Labor party does not disqualify a citizen for membership in the United Labor party.'"" This resolution encouraged the Socialists in their attack on the policies of the Singletaxers in the party. In the election of delegates to the state convention, they tried to push ahead their candidates and to insert their views in the instructions to the delegates. These actions of the Socialists evoked from the press of the old parties the opinion that, as in the case of the Leader, the Socialists were endeavoring to capture the United Labor party for their own purposes. These rumors and the energetic agitation by the Socialists in behalf of their views and philosophy led the Singletaxers to a definite decision to oust the Socialists from the United Labor party. / The County General Committee met on August 5. One of the questions to be considered was the above quoted resolution of the County Executive Committee on the eligibility of the Socialists to the United Labor party. After discussing the report of the County Executive Committee, delegate Aiigust Mayer** of the tenth assembly district rose and moved to approve the report save that part of it which contained the above resolution. This motion created much confusion. Some demanded its adoption, some wanted to reject it, but most loud were the voices of those who were calling for a ruling by the chairman. When compara- tive order was restored. Chairman McMackin ruled as follows: "If I am compelled to, I shall have to rule that, according to the constitution, all parties which have nominated and run can- didates are political parties, and are conlprehended by the letter "Leader, Aug. 5, 1887, p. 2; Standard, Aug-. 13, 1887, p. 1. «A former "walking delegate" for the American Fresco-Painters' Union. [352] SPBBK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 107 of the section."** He based his ruling on the following argu- ments: The Socialist party was certainly a political party; the Greenbackers had been admitted because they dismembered their party and came in as individuals — ^the Socialists ought to do likewise. In summing up his arguments, he concluded : "We cannot afford to tolerate Greenback, Irish, German or Socialist factions here. We must stand for American ideas as American citizens. ' '*^ A vote was then taken and the chair was sustained by a considerable majority. Thus the Socialists were ruled out of the United Labor party by its highest authority in existence at that time. On the second day, the Leader, in an article entitled "A Fatal Mistake", replied to the decision of the County General Com- mittee. The arguments of the Leader^ were that the Socialist La- bor party had never been a political party; that where it had nominated candidates for office, it had done so purely and solely for purposes of propaganda ; that if the bare fact of nomination qualified that organization as a political party, then the Central Labor Union was also a political party, for it had repeatedly nominated candidates; that the Socialists (members of the So- cialist Labor party) had been accepted by the Central Labor Union at the beginning of the political movement, in the fall campaign of 1886 and by the County Convention of the United Labor party; and that in the discussion of the constitution of the new party, it was definitely stated that the Socialist Labor party did not come under Article I, Section 2 ; furthermore, in a letter written by the chairman of the party, John McMackin, to August Mayer of the tenth assembly district, a fortnight be- fore, and in the resolution of the County Executive Committee, it was expressly stated that membership in the Socialist Labor party did not disqualify a citizen for membership in the United Labor party. The Socialists did not want to be ousted; they were quite firmly against an open split. They considered the United Labor party as an organization very favorable for the propaganda of their ideas and philosophy. Furthermore, organized labor, in ** Leader, Aug. 5, 1887, p. 2 ; Standard, Aug. 13, 1887, p. 1. « lUd. [353] 108 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN their eyes, was in danger of being "side-tracked "-by the Single- taxers." The Socialists thought that they could more effectively prevent this by staying within the party. Thus the struggle between the two philosophical schools in the new party began almost in its cradle. SPEEK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 109 CHAPTER VIII THE OPEN SPLIT IN THE LOCALS Developments in the Assembly Districts In the local organizations of the new party the organizing pro- cess and educational work went on. Almost every district or- ganization had its debating elnb, and rooms provided with books and papers, while picnics and excursions gave the members and their families opportunity for pleasure. Henry George was quite optimistic about the future of the party. He stated that while the other parties were decaying, the United Labor party had the advantage "of having a clear principle and a definite idea. The land auestion, which is another name for. the labor question, has gotten so far into discussion that it will go forward now by its own momentum, gather- ing like a snowball."' What the conditions were, how the work was done, and what developments took place in the assembly districts, may be seen in the reports of the Standard and the Leader for the months of July and August, 1887. In the eighth, tenth and fourteenth as- sembly district organizations, an open split between the Single- taxers and the Socialists actually occurred as a result of the rul- ing of McMackin. In the eighth district, Hugo Vogt was chairman. At a meet- ing on August 5, a delegate to the County General Committee moved that the chair of the district organization be declared vacant, as Hugo Vogt, its occupant, was a member of the Social- ist Labor party. Hugo Vogt explained that the ruling of Mc- Mackin "was directed not only against the members of the Socialist Labor party, but against Socialists In general, for the purpose of getting rid '^Leader, July 2, 1887, p. 1. [355] 110 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN of them, as many voters seemed to have a prejudice against Socialism, and in order to gain those votes it was proposed to drive the Social- ists from the party.'"' The motion to depose Hugo Vogt was voted down by a vote of forty-seven to five. The delegates to the County General and Executive Committees were instructed, ' ' each and all, as a unit, to demand the reconsideration of the decision against the So- cialists as unjust and calculated to destroy the party.'" When the Executive Committee of the eighth assembly dis- trict met on August 12 to transact some routine business, it found in the rooms of the organization a number of members who had been invited by postal cards to attend a ' ' special meet- ing" of the organization.* Chairman Hugo Vogt declared that Lavener, financial secretary of the organization, who had signed the invitation cards, had no right to call a special meeting. Lavener answered that Hugo Vogt and many others were no more members of the United Labor party, as they belonged to the Socialist Labor party. Vogt was then asked by a member to make a ruling on the right of the members of the Socialist Labor party to participate in the proceedings of the organiza- tion. The chairman ruled that they had such right. William P. Eogers appealed from the decision of the chair, but the chair was sustained by a large majority. Lavener then called upon all members, non-Socialists, to follow him to another hall. He attempted to take the records of the organization, but was pre- vented from doing so. The struggle for the records was fol- lowed by disorder in the room. Lavener summoned help from the nearest police station, but before the police arrived, order was restored. Lavener was again refused the records. Then Bo- gert with his followers, twenty-six members, retired. They as- sembled in another place and elected a new set of offlcers and delegates to the coming state convention. Thus were elected two sets of delegates: the one consisting of the Socialists and elected by a regular meeting of the assem- bly district organization, before the ruling of McMackin; the 'Leader, Aug. 6, 1887, p. 1. »76id., and the Standard, Aug. 13, 1887, p. 1. * Standard, Aug. 20, 1887, p. 3. [356 SPEBK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 111 Other consisting of the Singletaxers and elected by a "bolting" section of the organization, after the ruling of McMacMn. The organization of the tenth assembly district was rapidly extending. August M. Mayer was chairman. At a meeting on July 27, was read the resolution of the County Executive Com- mittee declaring that membership in the Socialist Labor party did not disqualify a citizen for membership in the United Labor party. Chairman Mayer said that he would consult the County General Committee on the question, and pending a decision of that body he would retire from the chair. On August 6 a special meeting was called by Chairman Mayer. He asked all members of the Socialist Labor party to leave the hall. Nobody moved, but loud protests were heard from every side of the hall. A member made a motion to elect another chair- man, which August Mayer ignored. Another member then asked whether or not all transactions in which any member of the So- cialist Labor party had taken part were unconstitutional, and therefore null and void, adding that if this were so, the constitu- tion of the party was null and void also, as members of the Social- ist Labor party had assisted in drawing it up and other members of that party had voted for it. August Mayer answered that Me- Mackin had only decided against the illegality of the business transacted by the tenth assembly district organization at their last two meetings. Herzberg, "Walter, Lange, and Shevich asked for the floor, but they were declared out of order by the chairman. Reinhard Meyer thereupon demanded that the vice- chairman should preside. Then the chairman, August Mayer, dedared that if the Socialists did not leave the hall within five minutes, he and his friends would leave instead. When the five minutes were over August Mayer and his followers, eighteen in number, left the hall. Vice-Chairman Goldsmith took the chair. The places of the officers who had just left the hall were declared vacant ; among them were three delegates to the County General Committee. The vote declaring August Mayer's, office vacant was unani- mous, fifty-eight members voting in the affirmative. Thereupon Inew officers of the organization were elected. The resolution of the eighth assembly district organization protesting against Mc- MacMn 's ruling was indorsed unanimously. [357] 112 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN Meanwhile August Mayer and his friends met in Brecht's bowling alleys and, in their turn, declared vacant the seats of the office!^, elected by what they termed the ' ' Socialist Organiza- tion," including the delegates to the central organizations of the party and the delegates to the state convention. New officers and delegates to the state convention were elected. Thus appeared in the tenth assembly district, as in the eighth, two sets of delegates. Delegates to the state convention were elected in the fourteenth assembly district. At a meeting on August 8, a communication was received from the eighth as- sembly district, consisting of resolutions denouncing the County General Committee. Chairman Murray ruled that the resolu- tions should not be read. George Block appealed from the de- cision of the chair. The chair was sustained by a vote of forty- two to twenty-three, and the Socialists left the room. The next business of this meeting was the election of dele- gates to the state convention, as the delegates of the county gen- eral committee, before elected, were Socialists, and could not, ac- cording to the decision, be members of the party. The election of new delegates was made a special order for a meeting on Au- gust 11.^ The bolting Socialist faction assembled in another hall, de- clared that they represented the fourteenth assembly district organization of the party, and elected Francis Schaider chair- irian and G. H. Koenig secretary. George Block stated that there was "apparently a movement on foot to reduce the United Labor party to a middle class tax reform party .... George begins to find fault with the word "labor," and is apparently using the labor organization of this state to further his pet scheme. I should not be a bit surprised to see George and his party one of these days in cooperation with the Democratic party. The object of the Socialists is not to force any Socialist ideas on the United Labor party. What they want is to guard the working people against being defrauded and misled by any scheme entirely foreign to their interests. George fears the Socialists on that account, and for that reason he was anxious to have them excommuni- cated."" ^Standard, Aug. 13, 1887, p. 1. 'IMd. [358] SPEBK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 113 The meeting decided that the election of new delegates to the convention was illegal, as the delegates had actually and reg- ularly been elected by the assembly district before the ruling of McMacMn. At the meeting on August 11, in the presence of a number of sympathizers with the Socialists, there occurred a lively discussion on the split caused by the ruling of McMacMn. Phillip Duckfield said that the whole thing was in the interest of Henry George and his land theories. There was no labor question about the whole business.' The second set of delegates to the state convention was then elected. Thus appeared also in the fourteenth district two sets of dele- gates ; the one consisting of the Socialists, elected regularly be- fore the ruling of McMackin, the other elected also regularly, but aiter the ruling. McCabe moved that the delegates be in- structed to adhere to the Clarendon Hall platform. Murphy presented a resolution that the delegates be ordered to vote for a constitution for the United Labor party that would enable So- cialists to join the party. Dealing proposed to instruct the dele- gates to fight by "tooth and nail" every effort that might be made to change the name of the United Labor party. Shaider said that the delegates should at least adhere to the retention of the word "labor" in the party's name. All these resolutions and suggestions were adopted by the meeting.* At the last meeting before the state convention, on August 15, the Socialist faction adopted a resolution declaring that their 'delegates, if rejected by the convention, should withdraw, to- gether with their friends, as a protest against the action of the convention.' In brief, the twenty-four assembly district organizations of the United Labor party in the city of New York differed in their attitude toward the conflict between the Singletaxers and the Socialists as follows: Ten assembly district organizations,, 1, 6, 9, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, and 24, protested against the oust- ing of the Socialists from the United Labor party; seven, 2,, 3, 4, 5, 7, 16 and 23, approved the ousting of the Socialists; four, ''Leader, Aug. 12, 1887, p. 2. * Leader, Aug. 12, 1887, p. 2. 'Leader, Aug. 8, 1887, p. 2. 8 [ 359 ] 114 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN 11, 13, 15 and 21, did not express their attitude toward the con- flict ; three, 8, 10 and 14, had an open split between the Single- taxers and the Socialists, resulting in the election of two sets of delegates from each of those districts.^" The majority of the assembly district organizations adopted resolutions and instructions emphasizing the labor side of the movement — the difference in interests between labor and capital — defending the party's name with the term "labor" in it, and strongly favoring the Clarendon Hall Platform for the reasons that organized labor, having been united on it, had made a very successful political campaign the fall before, and that there were rumors current that Henry George and his followers were plan- ning to leave out the labor demands from the new platform. These rumors had some visible ground in the opposition of the "George men" to the word "labor" in the party's name, and in their desire to get rid of the Socialists in the party. The assem- bly district organizations strongly emphasized, among other la- bor demands, the shortening of the working day. Such was the situation in the assembly district organizations before the state convention. With reference to the conflict between the Singletaxers and the Socialists, the locals, as shown above, were divided almost into equal groups : the one protesting against the ruling of Mc- Maekin and the other, slightly smaller, approving it. However, the division does not indicate that the former were in favor of Socialism and the latter in favor of the Singletax theory. Only a small number of those protesting were Socialists, consciously opposing the singletax; while the greater part of them pro- tested solely because they did not want any split in the ranks of organized labor and did not want to lose the assistance of the energetic and active Socialists, many of whom were influential leaders in the trade unions. Among those who approved the decision of McMackin, only a small number were converted Singletaxers. Most of them sided with Henry George because he was a very popular man, under whose leadership organized labor was united and who had conducted the successful political campaign of the previous fall. "> Appendix IV. [360] spebk— singlbtax and labor movement 115 The Attitude of the Central Labor Union Section 10 of the Central Labor Union met on August 9. Delegates were present from the Progressive Musical Union No. 1, the International Millwrights' and Millers' Union, and the German Coopers' Union No. 1. By a two-thirds vote a resolu- tion was adopted in which it was stated that "this section of tlie Central Labor Union regards the action of the County General Committee as a deplorable mistake, and it calls upon the organized workingmen of this city to protest against their action, and insist that the United Labor party should remain a lobar party and maintain its labor character, as originally intended by the Cen- tral Labor Union."" The Central Labor Union itself was in a peculiar position. It was afraid to take sides in this controversy which would result in a split ia its own ranks. At a meeting on August 7, delegate Edward W. Finkelstone, of the Barbers', opened his speech by referring to the fact that the previous fall the Central Labor Union decided to go into independent politics. The mere men- tion of the term "politics" resulted in a motion to deprive the delegate of the privileges of the floor. This motion was followed by such disorder that Delegate Finkelstone could no longer con- tinue his speech, and the meeting had to be adjourned.^^ At the regular weekly meeting of the Central Labor Union on August 14, the Cigarmakers' International Union No. 10 re- ported that their delegates were instructed to request the Cen- tral Labor Union to bring peace and harmony in the TJnited La- bor party. Food Produce Section No. 6 sent a resolution con- demning the action of the United Labor party in excommunicat- ing the Socialists. The chair ruled the resolution out of order, inasmuch as there was no request attached. An appeal from the decision of the chair was made. The chair was sustained by a vote of sixty-three against fifty-three. Somewhat later the discussion was reopened and this time the chair was sustained by a tie vote.^^ '^Leader, Aug. 10, 1887, p. 2. ^Standard, Aug. 13, 1887, p. 1. '' Standard, Aug. 20, 1887, p. 3. [361] V. 116 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN The great number of the trade unions, including the Central Labor Union itself, did not take sides in the political contro- versy between the Singletaxers and the Socialists because they did not want "to meddle with politics" and were afraid of a split in their own ranks. The trade unions which did express their attitude were divided in very nearly the same proportion and for the same reasons as the assembly district organizations of the party. Just how many laboi" union organizations protested against the decision of McMackin is not known. S. E. Shevich stated, at the Syracuse convention, that there were twelve labor-union organizations, representing 17,000 worMngmen, which protested. His opponent, August W. Mayer, denied this,^* stating that if there were so many protesting unions, there were the building trades unions, representing over 40,000 men, which approved the decision of McMaekin.^^ Considering the fact that the German branches of the build- ing trades voted separately to protest, and that the building trades participated, in the making up of the above-mentioned tie vote of the Central Labor Union; it may be safely concluded that the labor unions which definitely expressed their attitude to- ward the conflict were divided in the proportion before stated. The Attitude op the Labor Leaders In the middle of July the Leader published a series of inter- views with the various labor leaders on political action, on the United Labor party, on its platform, and on the relations be- tween the Singletaxers and the Socialists. James E. Quinn, master workman of District Assembly 49, Knights of Labor, advocated unity in the labor movement. In his opinion, the shortening of hours of labor should be the first step toward the solution of the problem of the wage-system. In reference to the singletax issue, he stated that a labor party can- not be built upon one issue alone.^' Samuel Gompers, president of the Federation of Trades, said ^*Leaderj August IS, 1887, p. 1, col. 1. ^'Puilic, Nov. 17, 1911, p. 1176. ^'Leader. July 25, 1887, p. 1. [362] SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 117 that tlie labor movement, to succeed politically, must work for tangible results; that the ultimate end of the labor movement was the abolition of the wage-system; that George's theory of land taxation did not promise present reform, nor an ultimate solution; that the mere taxation of land values could not set- tle the questions between capital and labor; that the aim of capital had been to make the worker a constantly greater pro- ducer ; whereas the aim of the labor movement was to make him also a greater consumer; that the most important thing of all was, firstly, the reduction of the hours of labor so that machin- ery might be in fact what it was in name — "labor saving;" secondly, prohibition of the employment of children under four- teen years of age; thirdly, restriction and regulation of female labor.^^ Henry Emrich, secretary of the International Furniture Workers' Union, thought that the Syracuse platform ought to contain (1) nationalization of land; (2) nationalization of in- struments of labor; and (3) all practical labor demands, among: which the shortening of hours of labor was the "first and fore- most demand." He was opposed to converting aU taxes into« one tax on land values. "Other capital ought also to share the burden of taxation. "^^ Edward Finkelstone of the Barbers' Protective Union was in favor of the governmental control of monopolies. Among the labor demands he considered the shortening of hours of labor most important because "this, for us, is the question. "^^ Th3e Attitude op the SocuiiISt Labor Party The New York section of the Socialist Labor party held a mass meeting on August 7. Henry George, McMacMn, and Mc- GljTin were invited to participate in the discussion on the rela^- tions between the Socialists and the United Labor party. They declined on the ground that the meeting was called by a political organization other than the United Labor party. A resolution against the expulsion of the Socialists from the " Ibid. '^ Leader, July 25, 1887, p. 2. »Ibid., July 27, 1887, p. 1. [353] 118 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITT OP WISCONSIN United Labor party was adopted. In support of this resolution the following arguments were set forth: The Socialists had never forced their doctrines upon the party ; they had adopted its platform and would stand on it ; they wanted a labor party which would be capable of knitting all the elements of organized labor together for the purpose of satisfying their immediate and practical demands as a class in the struggle against capital; the Socialist Labor party was not a political organization iii the sense of the clause of the constitution of the United Labor party."" It was further stated that the leaders of the United Labor party had feared that the Socialists might stir up discon- tent by their criticism of Henry George's land theory, and that Henry George desired to make the middle or shop-keeping class the mainstay of his party.^^ The National Executive Committee of the Socialist Labor party sent out an appeal to trade unions in which it stated that Henry George was pushing into the foreground his one-sided land and tax scheme, his special hobby, which "contemptuously throws aside the wage question that brought him to the front.""* Attitude of the Leader The Leader strongly refuted the rumors that the Socialists were trying to capture the United Labor party. It wrote in an editorial entitled "Idle Talk": "All that talk of the 'boodle' papers about the Socialists 'capturing' this and 'sitting down' on that, about the United Labor party being 'tied hand and foot,' and the 'George men' being 'nowhere' — all be- cause a few men known as Socialists were in some Assembly Districts elected by a majority of voters as delegates to the Syracuse Conven- tion — is as malicious as it is ludicrous . .' . . It is but natural that in voting for delegates to the Syracuse Convention they should select men holding the same views as they do on social economic ques- tions. But these men have not the slightest intention of 'capturing' anything or 'sitting down' on anybody."" "In the preamble of the party It was stated that It was "chiefly a pro- pagandist party." Leader, Aug. 12, 1887, p. 2. » Standard, Aug. 13, 1S87, p. 1. '^Standard, Aug. 13, 1887, p. 1. ^Leader, July 28, 1887, p. 2. [364] SPEBK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 119 In another editorial entitled "What is behind it" the Leader blamed the press of the old parties for trying to split the United Labor party by attacking the Socialists, "resisting every effort that has been and still is being made to warp the political move- ment of Labor into a channel in which the very name and spirit of Labor will be regarded as too 'narrow.' "^*' The Leader, being opposed to an open split in the United La- bor party, proposed the following compromise : 1. Declaration by the Socialist Labor party, as it has already done in a resolution adopted last Saturday at a meeting of the New York section, that it is not a political party as against a bona fide labor party. 2. Reconsideration of the McMackin decision. 3. Investigation of the election of delegates in the districts where election is contested.^' The Attitude of Heney George After the ruling of McMackin, Henry George and his follow- ers had taken a decided stand against the Socialists in the United Labor party. To quote Henry George : "The platform to be adopted by the United Labor party convention at Syracuse should firmly and clearly define the position of the party with relation to Socialism. This Is rendered necessary by the organ- ized endeavor of the State or German Socialists to impress their peculiar views upon the party — an endeavor that has become so no- torious that any disposition to evade the Issue, whether or not the United Labor party indorse these views, would give its enemies a specious pretext to make the charge that it does."" McGlynn had similar views upon the conflict. Local Organizations in Other Counties Kings (Brooklyn) County organizations of the new party be- gan their actual preparations for the state convention at Syra- cuse on July 18. Meetings at which the delegates to the County Convention were elected, took place on the evening of that day '^ Leader, Aug. 8, 1887. p. 2. " The Leader, Aug. 10, 1887, p. 2. » The Leader, Aug. 4, 1887, p. 1. [365] 120 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN all over the city of Brooklyn. ^^ The County Convention was held on July 21. Almost all of the assembly district organizations in Brooklyij emphasized in their resolutions the labor side of the movement and demanded the adoption of the Clarendon Hall Platform as the ' ' only platform which contained a sufficient definition of the strained relations between labor and capital, "^^ and on which "United Labor could stand. "^° The 29th Ward did not consider the Socialist Labor party "to be a political body, but only an or- ganization of propaganda. ' '^^ The Kings County elected thirty-six delegates and as many alternates — three delegates from each assembly district. The organizations of the United Labor party in the other coun- ties of the state were not very strong; some existed on paper only. Besides the regular organizations there appeared quite a number of the Land and Labor Clubs. The other counties elected thirty-five delegates and twenty-five alternates all told, to the state convention at Syracuse. This was the condition of the United Labor party in the state of New York before the state convention at Syracuse on August 17, 1887, the preparations for which resulted in an open split between the Singletaxers and the Socialists. This split, in turn, led to a cleavage in the ranks of the party — the members of or- ganized labor. " The Leader, July 19, 1887, p. 2. '^ Leader, Aug. 4, 1887, p. 2. ^IMd., Aug. 5, 1887, p. 2. "lUd., Aug. 10, 1887, p. 2. [366] SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 121 CHAPTEE IX THE SYRACUSE CONVENTION AND THE STATE CAMPAIGN OF 1887 The Convention The state convention of the United Labor party met in Al- hambra Hall, Syracuse, on August 17, 1887. About 180 dele- gates were furnished with admission tickets, issued by the joint committee on state conventions. Thirty-four newspaper re- porters were present. Some of the big New York dailies had each sent several men. Tbe first test of the numerical strength of the two opposing factions came in the election of 'a temporary chairman. The nomination of Dr. W. C. Wood, a physician of Cloversville, was agreed upon by the Singletaxers ; later they changed the candi- dacy of "Wood to that of Louis F. Post, oh account of his chair- manship experience. The Socialists and their sympathizers se- lected Frank Ferrell, a prominent labor leader, as their candi- date. Several other nominations were made, but all candidates proposed, save FerreU and Post, declined. Short speeches were made in favor of these two candidates; the nomination of Post was seconded by Fr. McGlynn and supported in a short speech by Henry George. The vote taken by secret ballot resulted in the election of Post by ninety-one votes as against sixty-nine for Ferrell. Later the election of Post was made unanimous. Alvin T. Walsh and Thomas Devine were elected as secretaries. Two committees, one on credentials and the other on permanent or- ganization, were elected by congressional districts — one member for each committee from each district. Twenty-seven members were elected to the committee on credentials, and the same num- ber to the committee on permanent organizations. This ended the first day's work of the convention. [367] 122 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN The first business of the second session of the convention, on August 18, consisted of the consideration of the reports of the committee on credentials. "With reference to the contested dele- gates, the committee was divided. The majority, fifteen mem- bers, reported against the admission of the Socialist delegates "who still held their connection with the Socialist Labor party, on the ground that the decision of the highest executive author- ity was binding. ' '^ The minority report, signed by eight members, favored the admission of the Socialist delegates on the ground that the five ousted delegates were regularly elected before the ruling of Mc- Mackin, and no decision involving an interpretation of the law can justly be retroactive in its effect ; that it had not been ascer- tained who were and who were not members of the Socialist La- bor party; that the Socialist Labor party was not a political party in the sense of the clause in the constitution of the United Labor party ; and that it was so understood knd expressed by all party organizations and authorities, including McMackin him- self until his ruling. In regard to George Block, the minority report stated that he was not a member of the Socialist Labor party. The majority report denied him the Tight to be a dele- gate solely on the ground that the members of the Socialist Labor party voted for him. If the mere voting for Block by the mem- bers of that party should disqualify him, then all the previous proceedings of the party, including even the election of Mc- Mackin to the chairmanship, ought to be declared null and void, because the members of the Socialist Labor party participated in every proceeding and election previous to the riding of Mc- Mackin. The reading of the reports was followed by a lively discussion. Professor W. B. Clarke said that it was high time "to take the bull by the horns." He quoted the following plank of the plat- form of the Socialist Labor party as adopted at Cincinnati in 1885: "That the land and the instruments of production, ma- chines, factories, etc., and the products of labor, become the common property of the whole people. ' ' He then read the eighth political demand of the same platform that "divorce to be ^Leader, Aug. 18, 1887, p. 1. [368] SPEBK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 123 granted on mutual consent upon providing for tte care of chil- dren. ' ' He condemned both, the plank and the demand, as not only absurd but immoral ; and emphatically concluded that he could never stand upon the same platform with the men who upheld such views. Richard J. Hinton spoke on behalf of the Socialists. Five minutes was then given to each contested delegate to defend his credentials. George Block thought that "the whole feeling against the Socialists in New York was engendered by the sore- ness of Henry George's friends from the successful assailment by Socialists upon George's theories,"^ that the cry against So- cialism was not raised until a few of Henry George's men had been defeated in the election for delegates in New York, and that the tax scheme of Henry Gorge could not be carried out, be- cause the taxes would always be shifted upon the shoulders of labor. He concluded with the comparison of the expulsion of the Socialists with the excommunication of Father McGlynn by "another pope."' Hugo Vogt remarked that hitherto no labor organization had rejected him because he was a Socialist. He asked: "Was the labor movement to be wrapped up in one person — ^Henry George — and no one else?" He then expressed his hope that the listen- ers would not share the delusion that "if they put out the hated Socialists they would gain more votes. ' ' S. E. Shevich, having been granted the periods of two other delegates, had at his disposal fifteen minutes. He spoke in part as follows : "I tell you that by doing what you are about to do you are ruining your party .... In the course of time the great movement of wage-workers will again evolve and take the upper hand, but for the present your party will go into pieces .... There were Socialist writers who criticised Henry George's theories, but the very life of a great idea Is discussion and criticism." William McCabe of the other faction explained that he was regularly elected. August Mayer gave the same explanation, 'Leader, Aug. 18, 1887, p. 1. 'Standard, Aug. 27, 1887, p. 6. [369] 124 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN considering the election of the Socialists illegal. He believed that they had not initiated the political movement of organized labor in the eighties ; that they had come in only five years after- wards, in 1886. In conclusion he said, "First organize your men and then educate them ; and when educated, if they want a more radical platform they will make it themselves. ' '* "When the contested delegates had finished their speeches, Thaddeus B. Wakeman (impartial) proposed a compromise reso- lution that the convention should admit both of the delegations from the contested districts and give a half vote to each delegate. In support of his resolution he stated that the ruling of Mc- Mackin was really an ex post facto law. Thereafter a short ad- journment was taken. When the convention was again called to order, Henry George took the floor and expressed the hope that Wakeman 's resolution would be voted down, because it was unjust, a compromise that settled nothing; and that he stood by the decision of the County General Committee. He said in part: "The greatest danger that could befall this party would not be the separation of its elements — but would be a continuance within its ranks of incongruous elements." He believed that the Socialists were not going the same way as he ; that they wanted to nationalize the land and all instru- ments of production, to which he could not agree. He concluded : ' ' This is the question we must settle. We cannot compromise. ' '° Fr. McGlynn also opposed the Wakeman resolution. In closing the discussion the chair ruled that the vote on the Wakeman resolution would decide the whole subject matter of the contests. The vote resulted in the rejection of George Block by a vote of ninety-one to eighty-six, and of Vogt, Stein, Berg- man, Shevich, and Boehm by a vote of ninety-four to fifty-four." This vote was the second test of the numerical strength of the struggling factions. If one does not count the votes of the non- labor element, especially those of the representatives of Land *Neu} York World, Aug. 19, 1887, p. 2. 'Ihid. 'Hid. Two more Socialists, Walter Vrooman and Lawrence Gronlund, were excluded as nonresidents of the state of New York. [370] SPBBK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 125 and Labor Clubs, the labor vote was again divided almost equally, apparently for the same reasons as in the locals of the party and in the trade unions in New York. Even if the Single- tax faction did have a slight majority of the labor votes, it was due only to the direct personal influence of Henry George and McGljmn, who opposed Socialism and the Socialists all along the line. After having disposed of the question of the contested seats, the .convention took up the report of the committee on perma- nent organization. Two candidates were proposed for perma- nent chairmanship — John McMackin, and John R. 'Donnell, a former president of the Typographical Union. When the voting on the candidates was called, two delegates from the twelfth assembly district announced that they with- drew from the convention because the Socialists were thrown out. Two delegates from the twenty-fourth assembly district of New York followed suit. The vote resulted in the election of McMackin by 111 votes as against 58 cast for 'DonneU. The committee on platform was likewise divided. The ma- jority, including Henry George, reported a platform prepared by the latter. Naturally, it made the Singletax the main issue of the party. It repudiated any connection with the Socialist doctrines in the following negative form : "We do not aim at securing any forced equality in the distribution of wealth .... "We do not propose that the state shall attempt to control production, conduct distribution, or in any wise Interfere with the freedom of the individual to use his labor or capital in any way that may seem proper to him and will not interfere with the equal rights of others. Nor do we propose that the state shall take pos- session of land and either work it or rent it out. What we propose is not the disturbing of any man in his holding or title, but, by abolish- ing all taxes on industry or its products, to leave to the producer the full fru.its of his exertion, and by the taxation of land values .... to devote to the common use and benefit those values .... This increased taxation of land .... according to its value .... must, while relieving the working farmer and small homestead-owner of the undue burdens .... make it unprofitable to hold land for speculation.'" ''Standard, Aug. 27, 1887, p. 2. [371] 126 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN The last clause was directed to affect the farmers' vote. In the second half of the platform were included demands for the municipal ownership of public utility enterprises, for currency reform and for simplifying government and courts, as well as labor demands stated in general and loose terms; in short, all such issues as Henry George characterized as "insignificant,"* when compared with that of the singletax. The majority platform was adopted. The minority report was quickly voted down. Besides the singletax issue it called greater attention to the corruption in administration and courts and contained a demand for woman suffrage, and for propor- tional representation. The committee on resolutions and several individual delegates proposed a series of resolutions. One proposed that the State Committee in cooperation with the Central Committee of Land and Labor call a national conference of the party. Another de- manded woman suffrage. A third expressed the heartiest sym- pathy for the Irish people in their struggle for a national legis- lature. A fourth wanted a better regulation of civil service. All these resolutions were adopted. But the flow of resolutions con- tinued. One denounced the Democratic party. Another criti- cized Congress for not passing an eight-hour bill for letter car- riers. A third demanded a check upon the use of the Pinkerton men. A fourth wanted the prohibition of child-labor under six- teen years of age. The flow of resolutions containing such prac- tical labor demands would have continued longer if it had not been for the opposition of Henry George, who criticized the pro- posed resolutions in a short speech in which he exclaimed: "It ' seems to me we are adopting two platforms. ' '" The state ticket for the coming fall campaign was made up as f oUows : For secretary of state, Henry George of New York i^" 'New York World, Aug. 18, 1887, p. 2. 'New York World, Aug. 20, 1887, p. 2. "Henry George at first refused to accept the nomination on purely per- sonal grounds. Crossdale supported his refusal on the ground that the office of secretary of state was not of sufficient importance to put at stake the prestige gained by Henry George in the fall campaign of 1886. But when McMackln, Barnes, and especially Father McGlynn appealed to Henry George, in a stormy ovation of the convention, to rise to the duty toward the party, he accepted the nomination. [ 372 ] SPBBK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 127 for state comptroller, V. A. Wilder of Kings (Brooklyn) County, treasurer of the New York Railway Supply Company, 42 Wall Street ; for state treasurer, Patrick H. Cummins of Montgomery, a boot and shoe dealer in Amsterdam, N. Y. ; for attorney-general, Denis C. Feeley of Monroe, a lawyer and politician, who agitated for Blaine in 1884; for state surveyor, Sylvanus H. Sweet of Westchester, a farm owner in Broome County. Not one wage-earner was among the nominees. Before the ad- , journment of the convention, a delegate expressed his doubt whether the Socialists had been really excluded. A specific mo- tion was then carried approving the ruling of McMackin. This ended the convention. A reporter of the New York World interviewed some promi- nent members of both factions on the results of the convention. Henry George said to him : "We will lose their (the Socialists') votes but that loss will be more than neutralized by the gain in our ranks of American workmen."" Alexander Jonas, a prominent Socialist, said: "So George wants to catch the farmers' vote, does he? Does not he know that 40,000 farmers out in Ohio could not pay their taxes last year and were sold out by the sheriff? George cannot hoodwink the farmers. They can never understand his theories.""^ The ousting of the Socialists from the United Labor party and the repudiation of Socialism in the new platform of the party were the most important features of the convention. Now one may ask. Why were the Socialists ousted from the United Labor party? What were the real causes for such ac- tion? Which faction was to be blamed for the split? One can hardly get a correct answer from the Singletaxers or the Socialists who were active at that time. Each faction con- sidered itself right and the other wrong. Even some of the re- cent writers on that subject still put the whole responsibility for the split either on the Singletaxers or on the Socialists alone. The main argument in the former case is usually this. The Sin- gletaxers had captured the political labor movement represented "Wew York Worlds, Aug. 19, 1887, p. 2. "Ihid. [373] 128 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN in the United Labor party for their own ends; the Socialists wanted to save the movement, or at least its labor class distinc- tiveness, and were for this expelled; the Singletaxers were the guilty party. In the latter case a similar argument, though op- posite in its bearing, is made : The Socialists wanted to capture the United Labor party for their own purposes, and, to save it, they were expelled; the' responsibility for the split is, therefore, to be charged to them. The historical, analysis of the movement which can be made by studying the proceedings, resolutions and platforms of the meet- ings and conventions, the speeches of the leaders, the reports of the press, and so forth, show the chain of events previous to the split in the following light : There was an economic labor move- ment united in the Central Labor Union, irrespective of the philosophies, religious beliefs, political views, and nationality of its constituents. Out of this united economic movement a united political movement grew, not for the sake of furthering any the- ories or philosophies, but purely for the object of satisfying ex- isting needs. Organized labor wanted to secure, through control of the government, better laws, courts, police, and many other* betterments in labor conditions. For such independent political action it needed a strong popular representative. It so happened that Henry George was at hand. He was a popular writer and public speaker, a champion of the cause of the poor. His theory and reform scheme were based on the land problem, which had become important to the American masses. Furthermore, being an advocate of the cause of the Irish people in their struggle against landlordism in Ireland, he was very welcome to the Irish element in the movement. For these reasons, having been intro- duced by his friends, he was accepted by organized labor. The latter really did not care much for his singletax theory as such. But, nevertheless, Henry George brought it with him into the movement and tried to make it the main issue. As time went on, there appeared a small number of his converts — very small as compared with the number of organized labor. This single- tax faction headed by Henry George found itself in control of the political movement of labor. But in the same party existed another school or faction, the Socialists, inherited from the Central Labor Union.. This fac- [374] SPEBK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 129 tion, equally firm in its doctrines, believed that the Singletaxers, whose theory they considered incorrect, were trying to sidetrack the labor movement. This the Socialists sought to prevent through control of the movement. Hence the struggle between these two factions, which led to the split and expulsion of the Socialists from the United Labor party. It is hardly correct to put the whole responsibility for this split on either of the oppos- ing factions alone, if there be any responsibility at all. Henry George, his social philosophy and reform scheme, were a product partly of the previous philosophical doctrines and teachings of political economy, especially of those of the classical school, and partly of American conditions. The Socialists and their doc- triues were a product of industrial society in general, and of the peculiarities of European conditions in particular. We cannot reproach the factions for having theories, for they are necessary in starting new movements. Nor can we blame the f actions'f or fighting each other. Schools of thought ought to compete with each other, for this is the only way in which it can be determined which of them is better suited to the existing con- ditions ; in other words, which has the greatest vital power and, therefore, the right to exist. It may be said that the Socialists understood the labor move- ment, its meaning, and nature much better than did the Single- taxers. But what the Socialists failed in was this, that their philosophy, emphasizing as it did the social side of human life, was not acceptable to the majority»of the American wage-earners, who, though wage-conscious and organized as a separate class, still were not yet class-conscious — ^wage-earners among whom the individualistic spirit and a desire to become independent small producers prevailed. To return to the details of the conflict. It is necessary to note that although only a few of the influential leaders of the Social- ists were ousted from the United Labor party, the remaining having withdrawn voluntarily, the decision of the convention was categorical and a matter of principle. Every Socialist who had the smallest connection with the Socialist Labor party was liable to expxdsion afterwards. The Socialists were not willing to go as far as disbanding the Socialist Labot party. They un- derstood, furthermore, that they were not expelled for being 9 [ 375 ] 130 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN members of another political party, but for being Socialists ; for their theories and tactics which they advocated in the ra,nks of the United Labor party ; for their attacks upon the singletax theory ; for their alleged effort to capture the party ; for their opposition to the desire of Henry George and his disciples to con- vert the United Labor party into a party of all classes. The So- cialists, their actions, and even their existence in the United La- bor party, were a menace to the realization of this desire of the Singletaxers. That the Socialists were expelled because they were Socialists was best demonstrated by the speeches made by Henry George, McGlynn, Prof. W. B. Clarke, and Dr. W. C. Ward, at the convention, and by a plank in the new platform specifically repudiating the Socialistic doctrines.^^ It is necessary to mention the fact that the nationality of the members of the party also played its r61e in the conflict. The majority of the Irish element lined up with the Singletax faction, the majority of the German element with the Socialist. .This division by nationalities was itself quite comprehensive. The Germans have always had a strong communal sentiment and social viewpoint upon human life, both being inherited from the centuries long gone by. Furtliermore, many of them, before they came to America, were industrial wage-earners in Germany — the homeland of Marxian Socialism. The majority of the Irish immigrants had been formerly land tenants in Ireland. They had an individualistic viewpoint and were devoted Catholics. Hence their lining up with Henry George, as a land reformer and agitator for the Irish cause in Ireland, and with McGlynn, as a Catholic priest. In regard to the ousting of the Socialists, outside people were divided. Some sympathized with the Socialists because of a great "injustice" done to them. Some congratulated Henry George for freeing the United Labor party from "undesirable elements." The press of the old parties approved the ousting ^ If the Socialists instead of the Singletaxers had been in power, It might have possibly occurred that they would have ousted the latter from the United Labor party. In the previous years the Socialists had ousted the Anarchists from their ranks and at present they are trying to expell the Industrial Workers of the World from the Socialist party. [376] SPBEK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 131 of the Socialists, but it doubted whether Henry George could succeed in ' ' capturing the farmers. ' '^* The Peogeessive Laboe Party The blow delivered to the Socialists at the convention was keenly felt by them and their sympathizers.^^ They hoped all the time that the local New York movement would be ' ' controlled exclusively by organized labor and cut off from the state move- ment. "^^ Now that hope had gone to pieces. To decide upon a new way of action the Socialists called a mass meeting on Au- gust 22, in Cooper Union Hall. A day before this meeting the Central Labor Union met, and decided to bar politics from its sessions during the three coming months. When the question of parading for Henry Greorge canie up, the delegates were so .di- vided that the question remained undecided.^' The Cooper Union mass meeting called by the Socialists was largely attended and very exciting. All the prominent Socialists and their followers were present. A considerable number of the adherents of Henry George had come also. At one time a hand- to-hand fight seemed imminent, . but the outbreak was checked. William P. Rogers and S. B. Shevich were to be the principal speakers. Rogers declared that the ousting of the Socialists had been decided by the Central Committee of Land and Labor in room 28, Cooper Institute, before the ruling of McMackin ; that the Syracuse convention had been packed by "fake" delegates from the Land and Labor Clubs— organizations which did not represent labor.^* Sergius E. .Shevich stated that the Singletaxers had de- stroyed the name "United" by ousting a part of organized labor from the party, and had r,uined the name "Labor" because they had taken "labor" out from the platform of the party, putting in its stead an expression that there was no antagonism between capital and labor — ^the expression which was, in the opinion of "JVew York World, Aug. 19, 1887, p. 4. 1= Ibid. '^ Leader, Aug. 19, 1887, p. 1. ^■•Leader, Aug. 22, 1887, p. 2. ^^ Leader, Aug-. 23, 1887, p. 1. [377] 132 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN the speaker, "the greatest lie of the century." The only party that could succeed was a party representing the advanced ideas of organized labor; the various third parties which had arisen had been carried to their graves during the last few years be- cause they were founded on "one issue." The names on the ticket nominated at the Syracuse Convention, except that of Henry George, had never been heard of by or identified with organized labor. ' ' We are a party of struggle and war, we brand any man as a demagogue who sets up the cry of harmony be- tween capital and labor in order to attain success. ' '^° A resolution was read and adopted which sharply criticized the ousting of the Socialists from the United Labor party and called upon assembly district organizations opposed to the Henry George "ring" in the United Labor party to elect each three delegates to a conference on September 4, at Webster Hall. It also asked all trade and labor organizations to elect three dele- gates each.^" S. E. Shevich, the "rattlesnake" editor of the Leader, as the Singletaxers called him,^'^ continued to attack the singletax theory unreservedly. In an editorial on August 25, he wrote that the Socialists held a man "stone blind" who, in the pres- ence of costly machinery, interdependent production, and cap- italistic combinations, on a gigantic scale, could not see that ac- cess to land without access to mechanical means through which land is made productive, and raw materials converted into fin- ished products, would simply give individual workers "a free lot in the Potters' Field at the end of life spent in wage slav- ery ; ' ' and that the Socialists would welcome, "as a sign of awakening, the proposition to tax land values to their full extent. But to tax land is one theory; to tax nothing but land is quite another theory. To the first the Socialists do not object; to the second they object emphatically.'"' The Leader began to publish a series of interviews with prom- inent labor leaders sympathizing with the Socialists. George McKay of the Knights of Labor said that he would not vote for " Ibid. 20 Appendix V. '^Leader, Sept. 2, 1887, p. 1. "Leader, Aug. 25, 1887, p. 2. [378] SPBEK — SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 133 Henry George because he "disunited organized labor, watered Ms platform throwing labor out. ' '^^ W. P. Eogers thought that the wage-earners "knew little and cared less for his — Henry George's — pet idea and scheme of land taxation .... He got so large a vote that scores of self-seeking lawyers, doctors, political heelers and other dead-beats rushed into the United Labor party .... The rural districts were organized by a charlatan — Barnes — into so-called Land and Labor Clubs." The leader of the British Marxian socialists, H. M. Hyndman, published a letter on Henry George, in which he criticized the singletax theory and the ousting- of the Socialists from the United Labor party. He stated that Henry George did not un- derstand the operation of modern capitalism at aU, that he did not comprehend why mere confiscation of competitive rents would not benefit workers as a class — as if Engels, Toynbee and others had not pointed out his errors over and over again. In conclusion Hyndman said that the attacks of Henry George upon the Socialists could only benefit them.^ Friedrich Engels wrote from London on September 15, 1887, in a letter to Mrs. Wischnewetzky, in part as follows : "The repudiatipn of the Socialists by George is in my opinion an unmerited piece of good luck which will redeem to a great extent the — unavoidable^-blunder of placing George at the head of a move- ment he did not even understand. George as a standard bearer of the whole working class movement was a duper; George as the chief of the Georgites will soon be a thing of the past, the leader of a sect, like the thousands of sects in America."^' Henry George attacked and criticized Socialism and the So- cialists in his Standard in his own fashion. He found that Ger- man Socialism was confused and illogical in its methods. He refuted the term scientific for Socialism, because it did not look for natural laws. But the main points in his criticism were that the Socialists confused land with capital and ignored the indi- vidualistic side of human nature. He wanted to substitute the ^Leader, Aug. 31, 1887, p. .1. ^Leader, Aug. 31, 18S7, p. 1. ^ Brief e und ,Aus!Silge aus Brief en von Joh. Phil. Becker etc an F. A. Sorge, Stuttgart, 1906, p. 277. [379] 134 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN singletax for Socialism. "Make land free of access to labor anH all else becomes possible, "^° was his firm belief. In morals, especially concerning honesty and sincerity, each side gave credit to the other. The Socialists stated on many oc- casions that Henry George and Edward McGlynnwere honest and sincere men, though " stoneblind, " "fanatics," and "hobby- riders. ' ' At a meeting of the Anti-Poverty Society, on Aug. 28, Father McGlynn said, "The Socialists are frank and honest and brave. They tell us their ideas and can scarcely conceal their contempt for the present plan for society. ' '^' Then he went on to criticize Socialism for ignoring the individualism in which he believed. The assembly district organizations of the United Labor party were now confronted by a dilemma. The majority of them did not want a split in the party. But as the split had taken place there remained for them only to reckon with the inevitable. All the assembly district organizations, except the 8th, 10th, 14th, 20th, and 24th, the majority of the members of which went So- cialistic, indorsed the platform and the ticket of the Syracuse convention. Some organizations did it quite readily, some half- heartedly. A general fall of enthusiasm for politics was marked almost everywhere. In the Socialist districts new organizations, some of which had originated before the convention, were started. The Socialists changed the name of the assembly^ district organ- izations of the United Labor party to that of "Labor League." From all assembly district organizations which endorsed the Sin- gletax platform and ticket, the Socialists withdrew, organizing parallel local organizations. The same was done in Brooklyn. The Webster Hall Conference called by the Socialists met on September 4. Seventy-eight labor organizations, fifty-six trade, and twenty-two political bodies, had sent delegates, three from each.^^ In his opening speech Edward Ring said: "We have learned in the Central Labor Union to understand that we have to work together as industrial organizations. We have not learned yet to cooperate in political union as well."^^ ^standard, Aug. 6, 1S87, p. 4. ^ hoc. cit. "Sun, Sept. 5, 1887, p. 1, col. 1; Leader, Sept.' 6, and Oct. 30, 1887. 2° lUd. [380] SPEEK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 135 S. E. Shevich outlined two cardinal principles for the plat- form: (1) That the land monopoly must go, and (2) that the wage-system must be abolished. At the second session of the conference, on September 8, a platform for the new party under the name of the ' ' Progressive Labor Party" was adopted. It reafSnned in a skilful combina- tion the platforms of the Central Labor Union and the Knights of Labor. It demanded public ownership of public utility en- terprises and a currency reform, and contained a long list of immediate labor demands advocated by labor unions.^" At the next session of the conference, on September 11, it was decided to call a state convention on September 28, in Webster Hall. At a meeting of the Central Labor Union on September 18, the following resolution was proposed : "Whereas, at a meeting held by the so-called Progressive Labor party, at "Webster Hall, on September 8, resolutions were passed and business conducted in such a manner as to convey the impression that the said meeting had the indorsement of the Central Labor Union; Resolved, That as this Central Labor Union had sent no delegates, we are not responsible for their conduct, and fully repudiate their action In every respect."^' A motion to lay the resolution on the table was lost, forty- three organizations voting in the affirmative and seventy-six or- ganizations in the negative. A demand for a debate was won by eighty-seven organizations voting in the affirmative and sev- enty organizations in the negative. After an exciting discussion the resolution was adopted by fifty-five organizations voting in affirmative and fifty-four^^ organizations in the negative, while about fifty organizations refused to take sides and vote. This vote shows the attitude of the Central Labor Union to- ward the split in the United Labor party after the Syracuse con- vention. One-third of the organizations affiliated. with the Cen- tral Labor Union were indifferent toward politics and the re- « V maining two-thirds were divided, with a small majority in fa- vor of the Singletaxers. ^Appendix VI. ''Sun, Sept. 19, 1887, p. 1. ^ Ibid. [381] 136 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN ; The state convention of the Progressive Labor party met on September 28. Aron Henry, delegate of the Progressive Inter- national Cigarmakers' Union No. 10, nominated John Swinton for secretary of state. The nomination was seconded, and the vote in favor of Swinton was unanimous. John Swinton, in a letter sent to the convention, declined on account of lack of money and time, and because of ill health. But soon he appeared in person at the convention, which greeted him by a thunderous ovation. In his speech he explained more fully why he declined the nomination, and criticized Henry George. To explain his strong opposition to Henry George it is neces- sary to mention the fact that Swinton published a radical weekly paper, 1883-1887, in which he strongly supported the Central Labor Union in New York and favored the idea of independent labor politics. The term "labor" he understood as including not only the wage earners, but also farmers, small 'producers in gen- eral, and small merchants. He did not favor any element, fac- tion, or school of thought, especially. All labor elements ought to unite into one movement ; this was his pet idea. In the po- litical campaign of organized labor in the fall of 1886 he saw a partial realization of his idea, and supported the campaign as much as he could. Now, in the split in the ranks of the United Labor party he saw that his idea was going to pieces, and, in his opinion, Henry George was responsible for it. Hence his op- position toward the latter. ' ' Grand old John Swinton, ' ' as the Socialists called him, stated in an interview with a newspaper reporter, that he considered the George movement unsound "because the theory of Henry George was not an outgrowth of the evolution of the labor movement .... Henry George .... has got a cure-all; he carries with him the absolute nostrum that cures not only the hiccoughs and the .fnoUy grubs, but every disease men- tioned in Dunglison's Dictionary; and It alone cures, and nothing else can cure. He cannot surrender that without surrendering his identity; he cannot surrender It any more than I, as Calvinist, can surrender the theology of the Institutes .... Dr. McGlynn is the apostle who calls Henry George the prophet.'™ '^Leader, Sept. 19, 1887, p. 4. [ 382 ] SPBBK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 137 This was the ironical statement of Swinton. Afterwards, yielding to the insistence of the state committee of the Progres- sive Labor party he accepted the nomination for state senator in the seventh senatorial district.^* To return to the convention. The following nominations were made : J. Edward Hall, secretary and treasurer of the Machin- ists ' District Assembly of Knights of Labor, for secretary of state; H. A. Barker, cigar-maker of Albany, for comptroller; Henry Emrich, secretary of the International Furniture Work- ers' Union, for state treasurer; Thaddeas B. Wakeman, a law- yer, for attorney-general. S. E. Shevich proposed that the Progressive Labor party challenge Henry George to discuss the differences between the singletax and the socialist theories before a public meeting. This motion was carried and Shevich was elected to represent the party at the joint discussion. Thus the Progressive Labor party was launched by the side of the United Labor party, as a result of the split. According to the social status of the majority of their constituents, both parties were labor parties ; according to the main issue and the ory, one was a singletax party, backed by the Anti-Poverty So- ciety and by the Land and Labor Clubs and their Central Com- mittee — a pure singletax organization : the other was a Socialist party, backed by the Soci,alist Labor party — a pure Socialist or- ganization; and according to the dominating nationality, one was an Irish- American party, the other German- American. Both parties aimed primarily at agitation and the education of the people toward their respective ideas. Offices and voters they considered of secondary importance. In strength they differed greatly. The United Labor party was larger, better organized, and had a strong popular leader, while the Progressive Labor party was organized only a few weeks before the election and had no strong popular leader. With reference to the expected number of votes, each party was still quite hopeful. The Standard thought that the United Labor party would poU at least 250,000 votes, including 90,000 to 100,000 votes expected in the city of New York alone.^^ It '^Surij Oct. 27, 1887, p. 1. '^Standard, Aug. 27, 1887, p. 4. [383] 138 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN was claimed that Henry George himself expected 150,000 votes as a minimum. S. E. Shevich expected that the Socialists would poll at least 15,000 votes.^° The State Campaign of 1887 Henry George made an energetic speaking tour throughout the state, in which he was accompanied by reporters of the Her- ald and the World. Father McGlynn, Louis F. Post and other leaders also made speaking tours over the state, and agitated in favor of the singletax and the United Labor party. The challenge made by the Progressive Labor party to Henry George was accepted by the latter, and a discussion between S. E. Shevich and Henry George took place on October 23 in Miners' Theatre, at which Samuel Gompers presided. S. E. Shevich in his argument stated that the singletax, if realized without other social reforms, would be more brutal to labor than beneficial. He called the singletax a Utopian theory born in one mind, and said that the man who can force one idea upon mil- lions is only capable of originating a sect. He concluded: "From the very beginning, after the close of the campaign last year, the whole system of Mr. George and his friends has been to substitute for the large party of labor something on the one hand like a church, und on the other hand like an ordinary political machinery .... Mr. George has succeeded in founding what I might call the church of Progress and Poverty, but he hag not founded the great American labor party.""' In reply, Henry George criticized Lassalle 's iron law of wages. He stated that the singletax meant only a beginning of further reforms and readjustments in the social life, that it would bene- fit the farmers and wage-earners as well. "Employment being free and natural opportunities open, there could be no such thing as dispensing with labor. ' '^* This joint discussion was reported in full in the Standard. In reading it, one gets the impression that neither had any ad- vantage over the other, although Shevich attacked the single- =« World, Aug. 19, 1887, p. 2. '■•standard, Oct. 29, 1887, p. 3. » Ihid. [384] SPEEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 139 tax theory more energetically than Henry George attacked So- cialism/ The authorities of the Catholic Church continued their strong opposition to the United Labor party and its leaders, Henry George and McGlynn, condemning them openly and secretly. Patrick Ford, editor-in-chief of the Irish World, suddenly changed his mind and went over to the Catholic Church, turning against his former protege, Henry George, because of the ' ' open and violent opposition" of the latter to the Catholic Church. This surprising change iu the position of Ford was due, it was said, to the pressure brought upon him by the authorities of the Catholic Church, and second to the fact that the Irish World had lately been losing subscribers — an occurrence which was due, in the opinion of Ford, to his support of Henry George. The General Master Workman, T. V. Powderly, of the Knights of Labor, who supported independent political action of labor in 1886, refused at this time to support the United Labor party. The Anarchists, too, turned against Henry George. He not only refused to publish in his Standard a protest against the un- fairness of the trial of the Chicago Anarchists, but he published an article in the second issue of his paper in which it was denied that the Anarchists had not had a fair trial. The publication of such an article may be explained by the following reasons. First, Henry George was convinced that the article was correct. He was so much engaged in campaign work that he had not time properly to study the case. Second, he was decidedly opposed to the violent Anarchist tactics. Third, he tried to utilize every opportunity for "whitewashing" the United Labor party from the curse laid upon it by the leaders and press of the old parties which called the "George party" an organization made up by the "hordes of the Socialists, Anar- chists, Nihilists," etc. for preaching "blood and revolution." The publication of this article in the Standard was unfortu- nate, not only because its conclusions did not correspond to the real situation in Chicago, but because it did more harm than good for the success of the United Labor party. There were quite a considerable number of the Anarchists and their sympa^ thizers in the city of New York at that time, especially among the Knights of Labor. All these Anarchists were greatly dis- [385] 140 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN pleased with the attitude of Henry George toward the trial of the Chicago Anarchists, and they fervently agitated against the "George party." The Eepublican and Democratic parties made a very vigorous campaign in view of the coming presidential electi,on in 1888. Both, especially the latter, gave much more attention than in the previous campaigns, to the conditions of labor. In spite of aU these above-described odds against the United Labor party, it still received 72,000 votes as against 459,000 for the Republican and 480,000 for the Democratic party. The Progressive Labor party received only about 5,000 votes in the city of New York,^° and hardly more in the entire state. John Swinton received in the seventh senatorial district 2,900 votes as against 2,300 for E. E. Glackin o:^ the United Labor party, out of 24,000 votes cast for senatorial candidates in that dis- trict.*" The high hopes of both labor parties had gone to pieces. Bach received several times less votes than it expected. Furthermore, the United Labor party polled in the city of New York only 37,000 votes, that is, 31,000 fewer than Henry George received in the mayoralty campaign the previous fall. Considering a number of possible new voters who, under the influence of the Land and Labor Clubs and the Anti-Poverty Society, had joined the United Labor party, the loss of the labor votes in the city of New York was still greater than 31,000. Besides the diminu- tion of votes, the campaign resulted in another negative f eaiture. The list of subscribers to the Leader had fallen so low that the little daily paper was suspended soon after the campaign. Al- most the same happened with the Standard.- It lost more than one-half of its subscribers. From this blow the Standard never recovered. Had it not been a weekly paper, and helped by out- side supporter's, it could not have continued its" existence. Now, one may ask, what were the causes of such results for the United Labor party? The industrial conditions which had been at a turning point in the middle of 1886 showed still greater improvement during 1887. The relations between cap- ital and labor had become less acute. Partly as a result of this »" World, Nov. 9, 1887, p. 1. «S«n, Nov. 10, 1887, p. 2. [386] SPBEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 141 change and partly as a result of a strong political showing of organized labor in the fall of 1886, the police, the courts, and the legislature had also "improved" in regard to labor. AU these changes explain the decline of the labor excitement and of the interest of labor in independent politics. Many labor parties formed under various names in the other states of the Union in 1886 dissolved in 1887 and 1888. But the loss of al- most one-half of the labor votes by Henry George in the city of New York can not be explained by the general causes above in- dicated; nor can it be explained by a direct loss to the Pro- gressive Labor party, for the vote of the latter, having been only a few thousands, did not exceed by much the normal Socialist vote of former years, which was about 2,500 in the city of New York. The split had other much more important results than the direct loss of a few thousand votes to the Socialists. It had a negative psychological influence upon organized labor, consid- erably weakening its confidence in the success of the United La- bor party and minimizing its interest in independent politics. Apparently a considerable number of wage-earners partly ab- stained from voting and partly turned to the method of holding the balance of power. The new protective labor legislation fa- vored by the Democratic party could serve as an attraction for the labor vote. Besides the loss of confidence among the ranks of the party, the ousting of the Socialists themselves meant a loss of energetic agitators and campaign stumpers with some po- litical experience, and as a result it considerably weakened the campaign work of the United Labor party. This result of the split was understood by Henry George himself. Shortly after the state campaign, on November 25, 1887, he wrote to C. D. F. Gutschow of San Francisco, the German translator of "Progress and Poverty, ' ' explaining his action against the Socialists at the Syracuse convention and the harm they did for his state cam- paign. Nevertheless, he justifled the ousting of the Socialists, saying : "There was no alternative other than to consent to have the move- ment ranked as a Socialistic movement or to split with the Socialists. [387] 142 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN' Although this lost us votes for the preseat, I am perfectly certain that it will prove of advantage in the long run."" The unsuccessful attempt of the Singletaxers to convert the United Labor party into a party of all classes also contributed its share to the loss of votes. Wage-conscious organized labor could neither comprehend nor agree with the Singletax doctrine of the identity of the interests of employers and employes, both of whom it classed as producers of the same category. This at- tempt, while resulting in the loss of labor votes did not draw to the United Labor party the employing classes. As to the specific singletax issue, notwithstanding that a vague reaction against it had set in among the laboring masses, still it had, apparently, but little bearing upon the loss of votes. If the rank and file of the wage-earners did not favor it, neither did they oppose it, because the majority did not even understand this altogether too complex doctrine. Stm, 72,000 votes cast in only one state was a tolerably good showing for a new third party at that time. ''■Life of Benry George, New York, 1904, p. 501. [388] SPEEK — SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 143 CHAPTER X DOWNFALL OF THE UNITED LABOR PARTY The Split among the Singletaxees The United Labor party as a new political organization, in- dependent and distinct from all other organizations, had made its debut. Although the results were not so favorable as ex- pected, the leaders nevertheless very soon calmed down, finding the 72,000 votes quite satisfactory for the first step of a new party, for they considered the votes received as pure singletax votes given by the people "animated by principle, who can be counted on in any circumstances and against all odds. ' '^ Henry George, speaking of the mayoralty campaign of 1886, said: "But, there of course rallied around me large elements who neither understood nor appreciated the principles which alone induced me to accept a political nomination .... This year — 18S7 — a vote for me was .... a vote for naked principle . . . so uncompro- misingly and unhesitatingly asserted as to drive off not only the So- cialists, Anarchists, and cranks who constituted the 'progressive labor party' but also half-way men (reformers)."^ The conclusion which Henry George made was: "Let us push on the good work. ' '^ On this the Singletaxers agreed. But very soon arose the question as to how to proceed. According to a resolution of the Syracuse Convention they had to call a na- tional conference of the party and to convert it into a national party. To do this was only possible through a national cam- paign in the presidential election. As to this there appeared a disagreement among the leaders. The majority, headed by Me- Glynn, were in favor of an independent national campaign, while ^standard, Nov. 12, 1887, p. 1. 2 lUd. ' lUd. [389] 144 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN Croasdale and Post opposed it. They favored in the presidential election the policy of holding of the balance of power and adopt- ing independent political . action only in states and congres- sional districts. Their views appeared in the Standard as early as the end of November.* Now as to Henry George himself. Although he found some comfort in his belief that the 72,000 votes received in the state campaign were pure singletax votes, he was nevertheless greatly disappointed with the results of the campaign. The loss of so many labor votes in the city of New York .ajid the great loss of the subscribers to the Standard were to him not only a blow to the advancement of the singletax theory but somewhat humiliat- ing to his personal pride. In the Standard he again and again blamed McGlynn, McMackin, and Barnes for inducing him to ac- cept the nomination for secretary of state. Furthermore, if he had had any hope to accomplish his reform scheme by the aid of organized labor, after the state campaign he had lost it. His disappointment with organized labor and labor parties made up, according to his expression, of "incongruous elements", was now complete. As the backbone of the United Labor party was stiU the labor element, he naturally considered that the career of the Singletax theory and of himself was closed as far as the United Labor party was concerned. He afterwards stated sev- eral times in the Standard that the United Labor party had col- lapsed in the state campaign of 1887. As he did not oppose the idea of holding the balance of power in the national campaign, pointed out in the Standard by his closest followers, Croasdale and Post, he apparently already med- itated swinging the forces of the United Labor party to the Democratic party in the coming presidential campaign, hoping successfully to agitate in behalf of his favored doctrines in the ranks of the Democratic party and to increase the circulation of the Standard for the sake of the same doctrines. But there wks no immediate opportunity for such sudden change, and, more- over, the United Labor party and he himself stood on a strong singletax platform with some other radical demands — a platform which had nothing in common with the Democratic party. ^standard, Nov. 26, 1887, pp. 1, 4. [390] SPEEK — SINGLiBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 145 Very soon an opportunity came. President Cleveland sent a message to Congress on December 6 in which he advised a slight reduction of the import duties on some raw materials. It was far from being a free-trade message. It decidedly repudiated free-trade doctrine. But Henry George laid hold of this message. He greeted it warmly and commented favorably upon it in the Standard, call- ing "all parties, despite themselves, to aid Cleveland in his good work. ' '^ He started at once to agitate in favor of the free trade doctrine, shifting his specific main issue, the singletax, to that of a subordinate one, free trade. Some rumors began to circulate in the press that Henry George was abandoning the Syracuse platform and was going over to the Democratic party. As a result of these rumors, which apparently were true in view of the new attitude of the Standard, McGlynn invited Henry George and his closest friends to an informal conference of the leaders of the United Labor party at Cooper Union about the middle of December. There were present McGlynn, Mc- Mackin, Barnes, George, Post, Croasdale, and Sullivan. The tariff question was discussed at first. McGlynn, Mc- Mackin, and Barnes thought it to be the best policy for the United Labor party to ignore the tariff question in the coming presidential campaign, because this question, if raised, would split the party, and had been intentionally ignored in the previ- ous campaigns and platforms. George, Post, Croasdale and Sullivan believed that the tariff question in the presidential campaign could not be ignored, for it was becoming the main issue between the Democratic and Re- publican parties, and that the United Labor party ought to take also a definite stand on this issue. McGlynn then asked Henry George if he should go into the presidential campaign on the Syracuse platform, to which Henry George answered that he should not. Then the "McGlynn men" outlined the plan to call a national conference of the United Labor party and to make an independent presidential campaign in the following states: New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, 'Standard, Dec. 10, 1887, p. 4. 10 [ 391 ] 146 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN and Indiana. To this plan the "George men" objected on the ground that an independent campaign in those states would mean helping the Eepublicans to beat the Democrats, which plan they called the ' ' Butlerizing of the United Labor party. ' ' McGlynn answered that the United Labor party ought to go into the campaign independently and fight the rotten Democratic Tammany Hall interwoven with the Catholic ecclesiastical ma- chine, and that there was not any possibility for joining the forces of the United Labor party with that of the Democratic party." The conference ended without any agreement between these two leaders and their followers. The first formal split between them had occurred. The Standard made the tariff reform -its main issue in the coming campaign. "We cannot ignore this minor robber (tariff duties), and to fairly get at the greater robber (economic rent of land) we must fight the little one."^ Henry George found now that the two-party system, which he criticized in the previous campaigns, calling both the Repub- lican and the Democratic parties ' ' shamelessly corrupt and hope- lessly decayed," constituted "the normal political division in every country,"* and that they might hold together for a con- siderable time, if even "the life of distinctive principle has gone out of them ^ut to bring a principle into politics it is not always necessary to start a new party."' He denied now that it was altogether necessary for labor to go into independent polities, for "the real work of emancipating labor and bringing about reform is the work of education. ' '^° Not to frighten the leaders of the Democratic Party by a new- comer as their competitor for spoils and not to give ground for belief that he had changed his course for some personal interests, he stated: "I care little or nothing for party, for I regard parties not as ends but as naeans. I am not a political leader; and I do not aspire to be a political leader, not only for the reason that politics are not to my 'Standard, Feb. 18, 1888, p. 1. ^Standard, Jan. 7, 1888, p. 1. » Standard, Feb. 4, 1888, p. 1. • Ibid. '" lUd. [392] SPBBK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 147 taste, but that I aspire to something much higher, a leadership of thought."" The second conflict which resulted in the ousting of the "George men" from the United Labor party^^ occurred at a meeting of the Executive Committee of the Anti-Poverty Society on February 13, 1888. The George men constituted the ma- jority of the Committee. As McGlynn, the president of the so- ciety, learned a few days before the meeting that they were planning to suspend him until the next general meeting of the Society, he had appointed to the Executive Committee about a dozen new members, mainly from his former parishioners, ac- cording to the power conferred upon him by the constitution of the Society. "When the George men came to the meeting, they found about half a dozen new members in the room. To the ex- planation of McGlynn that he had appointed new members, E. J. Shriver, treasurer of the society, and Louis F. Post (both George men) replied with a protest, calling McGlynn 's new ap- pointment arbitrary. Meanwhile new members continued to come in, as did several iona fide members — George men. Both factions had foresightedly reenforced themselves by a method of "packing" — the McGlynn faction by new appointments, and the George faction by bona fide members. But McGljTin. had the majority on his side. William T. Croasdale presided. E. J. Shriver moved that the president of the society be suspended for a "grave cause" (for attacking Henry George for his new course in politics) until a meeting of the Society. This motion was sec- onded and an exciting debate followed. McMackin and Barnes declared the motion out of order. But Chairman Croasdale ruled that the motion was in order. Barnes appealed from the decision of the chair. A roll caU was taken by the chairman leaving out the bona fide and newly ap- pointed members. This action evoked stormy protests. A mo- tion then was instantly made to adjourn, and the George men left the room. The meeting was continued by the McGlynn fac- " IHd. "2 The Georg-e men were formally ousted only from the Executive Com- mittee of the Anti-Poverty Society, but it practically meant the ousting from the United Labor party. [393] 148 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN tion alone. A mbtion was carried to expel the George men, who had just left the meeting. A few days later the expelled George men of the Anti-Poverty Society gathered in a meeting as the Executive Committee of the Society, for the purpose of suspending McGlynn from the presidency. After a long discussion they abandoned this prop- osition and considered themselves as leaving the Anti-Poverty Society. It was obvious to them that a continuation of the strug- gle was useless, because the ranks of the Society were on the side of McGlynn. Not to make any further scandal, Henry George withdrew voluntarily from the Anti-Poverty Society. The twenty-third assembly district organization of the United Labor party formally expelled Henry George for "abandoning the greater principle of the singletax for the lesser one of free trade, for having spoken of the party as a paper organization, and for supporting President Cleveland upon inspiration from Washington. ' '^' Thus Henry George and his closest followers, a comparatively small number of men, not only had lost their control over the United Labor party, the Land and Labor organization, and Anti-Poverty Society, but were expelled from these organiza- tions. The real cause of the split among the Singletaxers was neither theory nor doctrines, either of the singletax or of the tariff, for they all were convinced Singletaxers and Free-traders. It was the question of tactics, the new course of Henry George, his going over to the Democratic party, on which they split. While Henry George was losing his popularity among the ranks of the United Labor party by his new course, McGlynn, the most popular man and hero on the Stamda/rd, was gain- ing influential power by remaining true to the original move- ment and its tactics. This and the strong personality of Mc- Glynn explain why he so successfully opposed the new course of Henry George and outwitted him. At a meeting of the Anti-Poverty Society on February 16, 1888, McGlynn stated: "We are not going to allow ourselves to be made the wretched little bit of a tail to the Democratic kite .... If he (Henry George) "Standard, June 2, 188S, p. 1. [394] SPEEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 149 comes back Into the party again, even If lie does not support Cleveland or the Democratic party, he will have to take a much humbler position in the ranks than he has heretofore held."" To this Henry George replied : "I am not ready to become the stalking horse and decoy duck of any political combination, .... Yet It is because I have refused to surrender not merely my opinions but my firm convictions (the neces- sity to support the IJemiocratic Party) that lie (McUlynn) has assumed to excommunicate me from the United Labor Party, and to declare that, if ever permitted to come back, it must be to take a much humbler position. If the doctor will think, he will find it diflBcult to Imagine a much humbler position than that which, out of deference to him, I have for some time occupied — that of an ostensible leader in a party in whose managing counsels I have been utterly ignored.'"" The National Campaign op the United Laboe Party The national conference of the United Labor party met in the Grand Opera House at Cincinnati, on May 15, 1888. Present were eighty-six delegates from, the various states, as follows : New York, 41 ; Ohio, 25 ; Kentucky, 5 ; Michigan, 5 ; Kansas, 3 ; Maryland, 2 ; Illinois, 1 ; Iowa, 1 ; Wisconsin, 1 ; Rhode Island, 1 ; New Jersey, 1. The conference resolved itself into a convention. An attempt was made to fuse with the Union Labor party, formed in a pre- vious year at a conference of labor and reformers' organizations at Cincinnati, but this attempt failed. There was adopted a platform similar to that adopted at the Syracuse convention. It reaffirmed the Singletax as its main is- sue, advocated the issue by the government of legal tender notes, without intervention of banks, and the administration by gov- ernment of railroads and telegraphs, and favored legislation re- ducing the hours of labor, prohibiting child labor and convict competition, providing for sanitary inspection of tenements, fac- tories and mines, and repealing the conspiracy laws. It declared in favor of the Australian system of balloting, demanded the simplification of legal procedure, and denounced the Democratife ^* standard, Feb. 18, 1888, p. 3. « Standard, Feb. 18, 1888, p. 1. [395] 150 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITT OF WISCONSIN and Republican parties.^® It entirely ignored the tariff issue. Robert H. Cowdry of Illinois and W. H. T. Wakefield of Kansas were chosen as candidates for president and vice president, re- spectively. The state convention of the United Labor party at New York was held in Cooper Union on September 19 and 20. As there were current some rumors that several leaders of the United Labor party were in a deal with the Republican party, McGlynn, at a meeting of the Executive Committee of the United Labor party on September 25, introduced a resolution, which was adopted, declaring that all officers of the party must sup- port the whole United Labor party electoral tieket.^^ The County Convention of the United Labor party was held at Clarendon Hall on October 10. James J. Coogan, a furniture dealer, real estate man, and large employer of labor, was unani- mously nominated for mayor of New York. Henry George in the Presidential Campaign for the Demo- cratic Party In the last copy of 1887 the Standard tried to show in an edi- torial that the Democratic party in the coming presidential cam- paign might get labor votes because the tariff reform was in the interests of labor.^* It criticized the supposed desire of the lead- ers of the United Labor party to gather again all the labor ele- ments in the party. It said: "Now, what his (McGlynn's) committee are waiting and hoping for is the formation of one of these 'labor parties,' composed of politically incongruous elements which have time and again proved utter fail- ures.""' It then criticized the Union Labor party formed at a confer- ence in Cincinnati on a platform "which was the result of the com- promises of such a mixture of heterogeneous 'ists' and 'isms . . . .' There are various indications that the committee of which Dr. Mc- Glynn is head are planning to make a mergement of what they would call the United Labor party'" with the Union Labor party, the Social- " Standard, May 26, 1888, p. 4. ^''Standard, Sept. 29, 1888, p. 1. '' Standard, Feb. 18, 1888, p. 1. ^'Standard, Feb. 18, 1888, p. 1. »> After the state campaign in 1887, Henry George refused to use capital letters in the name of the United Labor party. [396] SPBEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 151 ists and all the other so-called 'labor elements,' upon some sort of a hodge-podge platform.'"" Henry George denied, merely on constitutional grounds, that the singletax could be made an issue in the national campaign. To this McGrlynn replied that the Federal jurisdiction fully ex- tends over the District of Columbia and all the territories where the singletax can be realized by the Federal authority. Never- theless, the tariff reform, put forth in the message of President Cleveland, was to Henry George the most important national is- sue in the coming presidential campaign. "I regard the nom- ination of Mr. Cleveland as a more important political event than anything that has occurred since the cease of the war," he wrote in the Standard. The Sun charged that the advocates of Mayor Hewitt's pro- posal that the city should build and run rapid transit railroads had practically become Socialists. Henry George rejected this charge and blamed the Kepublicans for being Socialists. ' ' The protective tariff is Socialism pure and simple. "^^ The Mill tariff bill was reported to the house on April 2. The main changes were a somewhat higher duty on the poorer grades of unrefined sugar and a somewhat lower duty on the whiter grades. Henry George, commenting on this bill, expressed his satisfaction with it. "For the present time and situation it is probably better than a more radical bill would be."^^ He strongly opposed a third candidate in the coming presi- dential campaign. ' ' In such a campaign as this, any attempt to run a third candidate on a singletax platform would not only be idle but harmful."^* Even a singletax platform demanding ab- solute free trade was to him " chimerical, "^° because it would take away so many votes from the Democratic party in its prac- tical struggle against protection. "Thanks to Grover Cleve- land's patriotism and courage, a grand opportunity is offered us to preach them (the singletax doctrines) through the ranks of a powerful party ".^° '^Stcmdard, Feb. 18, 1888, p. 1. '^Standard, March 10, 1885, p. 3. '^Standard, Apr. 7, 1888, p. 1. " lUd. 2= ma. "Standard, Apr. 14, 1888, p. 1. [3971 152 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN He sharply , criticized McGlynn for not understanding the sirigletax principle. McGlynn in a speech caUed upon the city tenants not to pay more than a fair building rent. This Henry George termed as a "crazy demagogic scheme"^' of McGlynn who had "utterly lost his grasp upon principle."^* He then asked: "What right have tenants more than landlords to the free use of land made valuable by the whole community?"^' The George men or the Singletaxers — Free-Traders, as they now called themselves — gathered in Cooper Union on August 7 for a conference. To avoid criticisms and other difficulties the call was issued only "for those who have made up their minds to support Cleveland and Thurman, the matter for consultation will be only as to how this support can be most effectively ren- dered This will be not a meeting for speaking, but a meeting for consultation, ' '^" — so wrote Henry George, urging all singletax men in sympathy with the purpose of the conference to be present. The necessity of such conference Henry George explained by "the fact that men whose only aim in politics is the emancipation of labor and the abolition of poverty, are sup- porting Cleveland with all their might for the very reason that the advocates of the protectionist superstition are telling work- ingmen they should vote against him. ' '^^ Thus was a step taken to bring the Singletaxers — Free-Traders — together to find ways and means to fight those who were telling workingmen not to vote for the Democratic party. Louis F. Post was elected chairman. W. T. Croasdale then proposed a resolution requiring the gathering of signatures for a voting pledge for Cleveland, as had been done for Henry George at the beginning of the campaign of 1886. The pledge was entitled "The Singletax Cleveland Voters' Enrollment Blank." This plan was adopted. A campaign committee of nine was then elected to gather signatures for the voting pledge, and also to provide for the holding of public meetings and the distribu- tion of literature. '^ standard, July 7, 1S88, p. 1. ^ Ibid. » Ibid. ^Standard, Aug. 4, 1888, p. 1. SI Loc. (At. [ 398 ] SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 153 The leaders of the Democratic party in New York; although wanting the votes which Henry George could marshal for their party by his influence in the campaign agitation, opposed his radicalism on the tariff question. A fear that his preaching of free trade might frighten voters away from the Democratic party made them pray, "Deliver us-from our friends!"^^ and caused them to give out as a marching refrain in the parade of the Dem- ocratic party the following lines : "Don't, don't, don't be afraid. Tariff reform is not free trade! ""^ There was much incrimination and recrimination by the lead- ers of the United Labor party on one hand and the Henry George people on the other. The former blamed the latter as acting by "inspiration from Washington" and as being "renegades," "traitors," and "in a deal with the Democratic party;" while the latter blamed the United Labor party leaders as being "pro- tectionists sold out to the Republican party, ' ' and so forth. As a matter of fact these mutual incriminations were very feebly founded, if founded at all. The honesty of purpose of Henry George and McGlynn could not be questioned. If Mc- Mackin and Barnes were somewhat uncertain, McGlynn, under whose control these two men were, sincerely believed in the cor- rectness of his action for making an independent campaign of the United Labor party. Moreover, as a Singletaxer he was a convinced free trader. Ignoring the tariff issue in the campaign, he opposed both old parties, and if he hated the Democratic party more than the Republican, then there were certain causes which have been described. The same ethical credit was to be given Henry George. The radical change of his front was due to his entire disappointment in the power of organized labor, and to Ms desire to preach his doctrines through the ranks of the Demo- cratic party. No direct personal interests nor pecuniary gains were considered by him. Hardly anyone can hold either Henry George as a "traitor" or McGlynn as "sold out to the RepuJDlican party" on account of 32 The Life of Henry George, New York, 1904, p. 512. '^ lUd. [399] 154 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF "WISCONSIN the fact that some minor leaders in their following desired office or publicity making for that purpose a "deal" with the old parties, Democratic or Eepublican. The Results of the Campaign In the presidential election on November 7, 1888, the United Labor party candidate, K. H. Gowdry, received only 2808 votes, of which 2668 were polled in the state of New York and the re- mainder, 140, in the state of Illinois. The United Labor party candidate for mayor of the city of New York, J. J. Coogan, re- ceived somewhat fewer than 10,000 votes.^* This was indeed a very poor showing for the United Labor party, and meant its downfall and disappearance from the po- litical arena. No better success had Henry George and his friends in stump- ing for the Democratic party, which was badly beaten by the Republicans. The Singletax Cleveland Voters' Enrollment Blank had brought in only about 11,000 signatures'^ over all the United States. The number of subscribers to the Standard, instead of an expected increase, had decreased. The financial help to the paper was far below that which was hoped for by Henry George. The free-trade doctrine, which was the main thing to him in the campaign, did not become a popular issue at all. The American masses favored protection, and it was not so easy to change their mind as Henry George thought. So his new course proved to be a failure as far as its direct main aims were concerned. Commenting on the fact that the Democratic vote among farm- ers was weak, Henry George believed: "If the Standard could have afforded to send the farmers of New York, early in the campaign, copies .... for little time, it alone could have carried New York for Cleveland and Thurman.'™ This shows that Henry George still maintained the idea that farmers were a very suitable element for his doctrines, notwith- "TJie Press, Nov. 8, 1888, p. 1. "The Public, Sept. 1, 1911, p. 907. "nid. [400] SPBBK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 155 standing the fact that all the previous campaigns had resulted in an opposite direction. The utter failure of both factions in the national campaign ended the singletax agitation in the American labor movement demonstrating that the 72,000 votes given for Henry George in the state campaign the previous year were not pure Singletax votes which could have been counted on "in any circumstances and against all odds. ' ' These votes were given rather for Henry George himself than for his singletax theory. The split among the Singletaxers themselves proved to be even more disastrous for the United Labor party than the ousting of the Socialists a year before. What confidence for the success of the United La- bor p£irty was left among its ranks was entirely destroyed by the split evoked by the sudden and radical change of political front on the part of Henry George. Moreover, this change injured his favorable popularity among the masses and greatly lessened his following. The attempt to bring the singletax into practical politics and to make it the issue of organized labor did not succeed, and even the agitation through the ranks of the Democratic party failed to reach its direct aims, as the foregoing narrative shows. One may ask what was meant by all this trouble, and expenditure of energy and time, in the fervent prosecution of the singletax issue by Henry George and his friends. Had it no results whatever? It had a far-reaching educational value : It aroused the minds of the masses, it stirred up the reformers, it excited the pol- iticians, and it awakened an earnest discussion among academic circles, calling attention to the land problem and to the labor problem. The singletax agitation was one of the events in the birth of the modern American democracy. The Socialists issued from the struggle with the conviction that it was much better for them to make political campaigns independently than to fuse with other, non-Socialist parties, and to the present day they have never again attempted fusion tactics. The labor unions found through the whirlwind of the single- tax agitation, that it was better for them to confine their activ- ities to the economic field than to "meddle" with the attempts of independent politics on some purely theoretical issue. [401] 156 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN The Singletaxers themselves learned by their experience in the political campaigns that it was hardly possible for them to create a specific political party to prosecute their theory or to utilize some other party for the same purpose. In that respect they came to the conclusion that distinctive formal organization for their ends was perhaps "a little worse than useless, except as on occasion it might spring spontaneously out of large popular demands."" They worked out their own specific ' method of propaganda, a system, of loose conferences and agitation through literature and public speaking among all classes of the people in the na- tion, utilizing every opportunity. To this method they have adhered to the present time. But their gain from the movement was even more than that. They greatly popularized their the- ory, pushing it to the foreground as the leading issue of the mass movement. Every theory gets its weight and importance when it is applied to practice, and especially when it is backed by mass organizations. Although the Singletax theory as such was never accepted by organized labor — at least by its vast majority — it seemed to outsiders to be the real recognized issue of the labor movement, especially in the mayoralty campaign of 1886 and in the state campaign of 1887. This apparent support of the singletax by organized labor made it tremendously impor- tant, and, in the eyes of its opponents, even ' ' dangerous. ' ' This explains the alarm of the old parties, their press, and the au- thorities of tlie Catholic Church in New York during and after the campaign of 1886, and the excommunication of Father Mc- Glynn, in particular. But when the singletax ceased to be even an apparent issue of the mass movement, it became again quite a harmless theory. The authorities of the Catholic Church in New York found now that in the singletax theory there was nothing inconsistent with religion, that is, contrary to their previous statements, made after the campaign of 1886. McGlynn was reinstated in 1892, although he remained a convinced Singletaxer just as before, only with this difference, that he was no more a leader of or- ganized labor in its political efforts. " The Puilic, Sept. 1, 1911, p. 889. [402] SPEBK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 157 Attention should be called to a quite important reform suc- cessfully prosecuted by the Singletaxers with the decisive aid of organized labor. This was the Australian ballot system. The serious agitation in favor of this reform was started shortly after the campaign of 1886. It was taken up by organized labor over all the Union and within a few years adopted in every state. This reform, as a direct gain for the democratization of the elec- tion laws in America, remains as a living monument to the single- tax agitation in the labor movement in the second half of the eighties. Besides these practical, direct and indirect results, represent- ing an important service of the singletax agitation and its leader, Henry George, to the rising democracy, this narrative has tried to show, on a small scale but somewhat in detail, the pic- turesqueness of the American mass movements, the constantly and rapidly changing environmental conditions, the shifting of theories, doctrines, and reform schemes, and the radical changes in the methods for their prosecution; in short, the colors and shades which distinctly characterize the young and rapidly de- veloping American nation, ambitious as it is for achievements. [403 158 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN APPENDIX I* "New York, August 26, 1886. "James P. Archibald, Esq., Secretary, Conference Labor Association. "Dear Sir: — ^You ask me whether, if the labor Associations of New York were to nominate me for Mayor, I would accept. "My personal inclinations are to say 'No.' I have no wish to hold office, and my hopes of usefulness have run in another line. But there are considerations which, under certain conditions, would com- pel me to say 'Yes.' "I have long believed that the labor movement could accomplish little until carried into politics, and that workingmen must make their ballots felt before they can expect any real attention to their needs, or any real respect for their rights — before we can hope to alter those general conditions which, despite the fact that labor Is the producer of all wealth, make the term 'working-man' synonymous with poor man. "Since the question of chattel slavery was finally settled I have acted with the Democratic party in the hope that, dead issues being buried, the living issue of industrial slavery might come to the front. The time has now arrived when the old party lines have lost their meaning, and old party cries their power, and when men are ready to turn from quarrels of the past to grapple with the questions of the present. The party that shall do for the question of industrial slavery what the Republican party did for the question of chattel slavery must, by whatever name it shall be known, be a working- man's party — a party that shall reassert the principles of Thomas Jefferson in their application to the questions of the present day, and be Democratic in aim as well as in name. "I have seen the promise of the coming of such a party in the growing discontent of labor with unjust social conditions, and in the increasing disposition to pass beyond the field of trades-associations into the larger sphere 'of political action. With this disposition I am in full sympathy. I see in political action the only way of abolishing that injustice which robs labor of its natural reward and makes the very 'leave to toil' a boon — that monstrous injustice which crowds families into tenement-rooms of our cities and fills even our new States with tramps; that turns human beings into machines. • Ch. V, note 4. [404] SPEEK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 159 robs childhood of joy, manhood of dignity, and old age of repose; that slaughters infants more ruthlessly than did Herod's swordsmen; that fosters greed, begets corruption, breeds vice and crime, and con- demns children yet unborn to the brothel and the penitentiary. See- ing this, \ welcome any movement to carry the vital questions of our day into politics, and will do whatever I can to help it on. "It seems to me, moreover, that a fitting and hopeful place for such a movement to begin Is in our municipalities, where we may address ourselves to what lies nearest at hand, and avoid dissensions that, until the process of economic education has gone further, might divide us on national Issues. The foundation of our system is in our local governments. "Nor is there any part of our country in which there is greater need of an earnest effort to make politics mean more than a struggle for oflBce than in the City of New York. In this great city, the me- tropolis of the Western Hemisphere, municipal government has reached a pitch of corruption that, the world over, throws a slur and a doubt upon free Institutions. Politics has become a trade, and the management of elections a business. The organizations that call themselves political parties are little better than joint-stock companies for assessing candidates and dividing public plunder, and even judi- cial positions are virtually bought and sold. "With unsurpassed natural advantages — the gateway of a conti- nental commerce — New Ydrk is behind in all else that the citizen might justly be proud of. In spite of the immense sums constantly expended, her highways, her docks, her sanitary arrangements, are far inferior to those of first-class European cities; the great mass of her people must live in tenement houses, and human beings are here packed together more closely than anywhere else in the world; and though the immense values created by the growth of population might, without imposing any burden upon production, be drawn upon to make New York the most beautiful and healthful of cities, she is dependent upon individual benevolence for such institutions as the Astor Library and the Cooper Institute, and private charity must be called upon for "fresh-air funds" to somewhat lessen the horrible in- fant mortality of the tenement district. Such parts as we have are beyond the reach of the great mass of the population who, living in contracted rooms, have no other place than the drinking-saloon for the gratification of social Instincts, while hundreds of thousands of chil- dren find their only playground in crowded streets. "Hitherto all movements for municipal reform in New York have sprung from political 'halls,' or have originated with wealthy citi- zens, whose sole and futile remedy for civic corruption has been the election of respectabilities to office. They have aimed at effects rather than at causes, at outgrowths rather than at the root, and they have accomplished nothing radical or lasting. [405] 160 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN "It is time for the great body of the citizens of New York to take some step to show that they have a deeper interest in the government of this great city than whether this or that set of politicians shall divide the spoils, and to demonstrate their power in a way to make their influence felt in every branch of administration. ' And in the American city where monstrous wealth and monstrous want make their most shocking contrast is a fitting place to begin a movement which shall aim at the final assertion of the natural and unalienable rights of man. "A movement begun by the Labor Associations in this spirit, and with these aims, would not be a class movement. It would in reality be a movement of the 'masses against the rule of the classes.' It would draw strength from that great body of citizens who, though not working-men in the narrow sense of the term, feel the bitterness of the struggle for existence as much as does the manual laborer, and are as deeply conscious of the corruptions of our politics and the wrongs of our social system. In its broad political sense the term 'workingman' does not refer to particular occupations, but divides those who have to work that others may enjoy from those who can appropriate the produce of others' work. There is and there can be an Idle class only where there is ^ disinherited class. Where all men stood on an equality with regard to the use of the earth and the enjoyment of the bounty of their Creator, all men would belong to the working class. 'He who will not work, neither shall he eat' is not merely the Injunction of the Apostle, it is the mandate of Nature which yields wealth to Labor, and to Labor alone. "Feeling on these matters as I have said, my sense of duty would not permit me to refuse any part assigned me by the common con- sent of earnest men really bent upon carrying into politics the prin- ciples I hold dear. Yet before I' can accept the nomination of which you speak I wish to have it clearly shown that the workingmen of New York want me to be a candidate and will support me with their votes. I have no dread of finding myself in the minority; but enough so-called labor movements have proved failures. Another failure would hurt the very cause we wish to help. "Such a movement as is now proposed ought not to be lightly entered into. The workingmen of New York have it in their power to elect whom they please, and to open a new era in American poli- tics; but to do this they must be united, must be earnest, and must have faith in themselves. Outside of the ranks of organized labor there are thousands and thousands heartily sick of the corruptions of machine politics who would join in a movement for principle that gave fair promise of success. But without this promise of success an independent movement could not command even the votes of those who wished it well. For the majority of men, though they may ap- [ 406 ] SPBEK— SINGLETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 161 plaud his nomination, will not vote for a third candidate whose elec- tion seems hopeless. Therefore it is that any political movement such as you propose must manifest strength at the outset if it is to prove formidable at the polls. "It is both the right and duty of workingmen to turn to political action for the redress of grievances. Whatever excuse there may be for violence in countries where aristocratic political institutions yet exist, and standing armies prevent expression of the popular will, here, where manhood suffrage prevails and the people are the source of political power, the ballot is the proper means of protest, and the only instrument of reform. And it is only by its intelligent use that social disaster can be avoided. "For this reason it seems to me that the only condition on which it would be wise in a Labor Convention to nominate me, or on which I should be justified in accepting such a nomination, would be that at least thirty thousand citizens should, over their signatures, ex- press the wish that I should become a candidate, and pledge them- selves in such case to go to the polls and vote for me. This would be a guaranty that there should be no ignominious failure, and a mandate that 1 could not refuse. On this condition I would accept the nomination if tendered to me. "Such a condition, I know, is an unusual one; but something un- usual is needed to change the habitual distrust and contempt with which workingmen's nominations have come to be regarded, into the confidence that is necessary to success. It may be harder to get thirty thousand signatures in advance than, with the confidence thus inspired, to bring several times that number of votes to the polls; but unless there is in the movement earnestness enough to do hard things, it is idle to enter upon the work. "With this frank statement of my views and feelings, I put the matter, through you, in the hands of the Conference and of the Labor Organizations. Fraternally yours, Hbnet Geobge." [407] 162 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN APPENDIX II* Constitution and by-laws adopted by the temporary Executive Com- mittee of the United Labor Party on December 1, 1886. ""We, the representatives of the United Labor Party of the city and county of Nevr York, believe that governmental corruption and In- justices spring from neglect of the self-evident truth that all men are created equal, that the advantages arising from social growth and improvement belong, of right, to society at large; that in the drawing of grand-jurors there shall be no distinction of class; that the prop- erly qualification for trial jurors should be abolished; that equal pay for equal work should be in public employment accorded without dis- tinction of sex; that, police interference with peaceful assemblages should cease; that our elective methods should be reformed; that the people of New York should have full control of their own local affairs; that the procedure of our courts should be simplified; that the laws for the safety and sanitary, Inspection of buildings should be en- forced; that all laws which bear injustly on labor should be abolished; that in public work all labor should be directly employed; that all taxes on buildings and improvements should be abolished; that all taxes should be levied on land values which arose from and are due solely to increase of population; that existing means of transit should no longer be left in the hands of corporations, but should by lawful process be assumed by the city and operated for the public benefit; and that the true purpose of government is the maintena;Qce of that sacred right of property which secures to every man the fruits of his own labor — do hereby declare and establish the follow- ing constitution and by-laws. "The organization of this party shall consist: "1. Of a County General Committee. "2. Of a County Executive Committee. "3. Of Assembly District Organizations. "4. Of Assembly District Executive Committees. "5. Of Election District Organizations. "The County General Commfttee shall be the highest authority within this county. This body alone shall have the power to amend or to alter this Constitution. "The officers of the General Committee shall consist of a Chairman, • Chap. VII, note 6. [408] SPEEK— SINGLETAX AND LiABOR MOVEMENT 163 a Recording Secretary, a Financial Secretary, and a Treasurer. These officers shall he elected by the General Committee for the term of one year, and shall remain In office imtll successors are elected. "The delegates to the General Committee shall be elected by the Assembly District organization in the following manner: For each 200 votes, or majority fraction thereof, cast by that district at the previous election for the candidates of this party, one member of the district organization shall be elected as delegate to the committee. "Each delegate to the General Committee shall be in possession of proper credentials for which blanks shall be furnished by the County Executive Committee, and which shall be signed by the Chairman and Recording Secretary of the District Association. ^'Regular meetings of the General Committee shall be held the first Thursday in each month. A special meeting can be called when two- thirds of the members of the County Executive Committee so decide. THE. COUNTY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. "The delegation from each Assembly District shall submit to the General Committee for approval the name of one of their number to serve on the Executive Committee. "The duties of the County Executive Committee shall be to exer- cise general supervision over the county organization; to represent the same; to approve or disapprove the elections of all officers elected by the Assembly District organization; and to carry out all meas- ures appertaining to the same. "The County Executive Committee shall meet at least once every two weeks. "The County Executive Committee shall have the right to levy a regular or special tax on the members of the Assembly District Or- ganizations, subject to the approval of the General Committee. "The County Executive Committee shall call and make arrange- ments for Congressional, Senatorial, Assembly, Aldermanic, and Ju- diciary Conventions within this county and shall fix the representa- tion thereto. All such conventions shall be presided over by per- sons selected by the County Executive Committee. Such conventions shall select a vice-president and a recording secretary and shall trans- act no other business than the nomination of candidates. ASSEMBLY DISTRICT ORGANIZATIONS. "The Assembly District Organizations shall consist of citizens and those who have declared their intention to become such, living within a certain assembly district who recognize and subscribe to the plat- form and principles of this party, and who have severed all connec- [409] 164 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN tion with other existing parties. Each applicant for membership must be vouched for by two members of the same organization. "The oflacers of each Assembly District Organization shall consist of a President, Vice-President, Recording Secretary, Corresponding Secretary, Financial Secretary, Treasurer, and Sergeant-at-Arms, each to be elected for the term of one year. "Rules for the election of standing and special committees. "Duties usual in recognized associations. "Applications for membership. "For all election public notice in recognized party's paper. "Dues no less than ten cents each month. In cases of inability to pay members will be excused for certain period. "Notes of meetings. "The Assembly District Organization shall (besides the transaction of political business) provide for lectures, debates, and entertain- ments for the education of its members and for the dissemination of the principles of the party. "Twenty-five members constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. ASSEMBLY DISTRICT EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. "One member from each election district; duty-supervision and to carry out all orders of Assembly District Organization. "Meeting twice each month. "May suspend or expel any member of the Assembly District Or- ganization. Expelled member may appeal at the next meeting of the Assembly District Organization. ELECTION DISTRICT ORGANIZATION. "All members of an Assembly District Organization shall be mem- bers of their respective election district. "Duties of the election district representative, supervision. "To make house to house canvasses during the campaign and to cause worthy citizens to join the organization of the district." This was adopted unanimously on December 1, 1886.' 'Leader, Dec. 2, 1886, p. 1. [410] SPEEK— SINGLBTAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 165 APPENDIX III* The project of the provisions for the constitutional convention and other labor laws, worked out by the laws' committee of the Central Labor Union and the United Labor Party at the end of 1886. 1. An act to amend Chapter 410 of the laws of 1882, making de- partments and commissions in New York single-headed, and providing for their election by popular vote. 2. An act regulating employers' liability for Injuries to servants and others. 3. An act removing property qualification from grand and petit jurors. 4. An act limiting the time in which covenants may be allowed to run with the land. 5. An act forbidding the employment of children under the age of fourteen years in any capacity. 6. An act allowing the same privileges in actions for the recovery of wages to worklngmen as the law now gives to women. 7. An act preventing the removal from the District Courts to the Common Pleas on giving a bond. 8. An act preventing the "truck" system. 9. An act amending the mechanics' Hen law. 10. An act abolishing the conspiracy laws. 11. An act providing for the incorporation of trades unions, and other associations organized by the working masses. 12. An act allowing inspectors of elections to any political party polling one-fourth of the total vote cast in any city or county. 13. An act providing for an Improved system of balloting at elec- tions. 14. An act to improve and further expand the law and practice of arbitration. 15. An act providing additional remedies in cases of injuries to children employed in factories. 16. An act providing for the safety and more complete sanitary in- spection of places where mining, manufacturing and building are carried on. 17. An act abolishing fees in District Courts. 18. An act abolishing extra allowances to lawyers in all cases. * Chap. VII, note 4, [411 166 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN 19. An act raising the limit of recovery from $5,000 to $10,000 for in- juries resulting in death. 20. An act providing for industrial or technical education in con- nection with the common school system. 21. An act repealing the act which requires that a hond must be given by guardians ad litem, of minors in accident cases. 22. An act to regulate the business of pawnbroking. 23. An act to take away the power of parties to an action to stipu- late that referees shall receive any more than the statutory rate of compensation. 24. An act equalizing military as well as jury duty. "We intend pushing all these measures energetically in the Legis- lature, and hope that many, if not all of them, Will be placed on our statute book." Fred C. Lbubuscher, Secretary of the Laws Committee^ '■Leader, Dec. 31, 1886, p. 1. [412] SPBBK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 167 APPENDIX IV* Resolutions of the Assembly District Organizations of the United Labor Party in the State of New York before the State Convention at Syracuse, 1887. 1st. Assembly District: Jeremiah Murphy, chairman; delegates elected to the State Convention: Edw. McGlynn, J. H. Norton, and Thos. Moran; alternates: Daniel Murphy, John Fay and Wm. Brick- field. At a meeting on August 11 a resolution was adopted condemning the decision of the County General Committee in regard to the ex- clusion of the members of the Socialist Labor Party and demanding the reconsideration of ,the decision.^ 2nd. Assembly District: W. Russell, chairman; delegates: James Degnan,. J. T. Burke, and J. Oliver Kane; alternates: John Crowley, Wm. E. Fales, and N. A. Tucker. At a meeting on August 9 the ruling of McMackin against the Social- ists was approved.' 3rd. Assembly District: Wm. Jioles, chairman; delegates: G. W. Robinson, Wm. Lockhead, and P. J. Doody; alternates: L. P. Howe, Fred Relbetanz, and D. Kronberg. At a regular meeting on August 9th, the action of the County General Committee against the Socialists was indorsed.* At a special meeting on August 15 the delegates were instructed to sustain the eight-hour law for letter-carriers and to advocate the soldiers and sailors' bill." 4th. Assembly District: Phillip J. Scannel, president; delegates: P. J. Scannel, Wm. B. Clark, and John Tobin; alternates: E. I. Dontey, Dr. Coughlin, and B. Lowe. At a meeting on August 13 a letter was received from John Mc- Mackin explaining his ruling in regard to members of the Socialist Labor Party. After a long discussion the ruling of McMackin was Indorsed.' • Chap. VIII, note 10. 'Leader, Aug. 12, 1887, p. 2. 'Leader, Augr. 10, 1887, p. 2; Standard, Aug. 13, 1887, p. 1. *Ibid. 'Leader, Aug. 16, 1887, p. 2. 'Leader, Aug. 15, 1887, p. 2. [413] 168 BTJLXiETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN 5tli Assembly District Delegates: J. J. Joyes, Charles White, and Edward Kienbe; alternates: Carpar Aronson, Daniel McCloskey, Joseph B. Boyte. At a meeting on August 10 the ruling of McMackin was indorsed.' 6th Assembly District. Delegates: Thos. F. Reiley, James F. Cros- son, and Thos. F. Kenney. At a meeting on August 10 a resolution was adopted declaring against the ruling of McMackln and demanding that the County Gen- eral Committee ought to reconsider the ruling.' 7th Assembly District. Population mainly wage-earners, but some- what migratory and apathetic in elections; many clerks in the re- tail stores controlled by their employers." At a meeting on July 28 the following delegates were elected: W. J. Croasdale, H. Alden Spencer and E. A. Dease. Alternates: A. T. Thayer, "W. G. Crowley and P. Connoghan. Then followed a bitter discussion between the Singletaxers and the Socialists. Henry Cordes attacked socialism and socialistic tend- encies in the United Labor Party, while several other members held that the Socialists "were the only honest members of the party."" R. J. Hinton resigned from the County General Committee and As- sembly Executive Committee." At a meeting on August 11 the ruling of McMackln was indorsed.'" 9th Assembly District. Delegates: Wm. A. Mass, John Kehoe, and J. J. Sweeney; alternates: Eugene Blume, Geo. A. Hunter, and F. Herben. At a meeting on July 12 William A. Mass offered a resolu- tion to the effect that the delegates be instructed to make no deals and to nominate none other than the straight Labor ticket, which was adopted. At a meeting July 21 on instruction to the delegates it was una.nlmously accepted with the following directions: (1) To keep harmony in the delegation from the city of New York; (2) Not to allow any clause to be Inserted in the platform which could only have for its effect to estrange a "valuable and pure minded element" [the Socialists] from us; (3) To see that the platform does not talk "over the heads of the masses of our voting population;" (4) To en- deavor to embody in the platform that all agencies which are monopo- lies in their character, shall be nationalized; (5) Not to try to form a school of political science, but to help to shape a party strong enough to redeem the republic of Jefferson and Franklin.'' ''Standard, Aug., 20, 1S8T, p. 3. ^Standard, Aug. 13, 1887, p. 1. 'Leader, July 2, 1887, p. 1. ^'Leader, July 29, 1887, p. 2. " lUd. "Standard, Aug. 13, 1887, p. 1. ''Leader, July 22, 1887, p. 2. [414] SPEEK— SINGLiETAX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 169 11th Assembly District. Colored voters strong — in sympathy with labor; Frank Ferrell's residence; the majority of the election dis- tricts organized; delegates: Frank J. Ferrell, "William P. Rogers, and T. B. Wakeman; alternates: Edward W. Davis, Charles C. Poole, and J. F. Darling. 12th Assembly District. Delegates: Paul Wilzig, B. Davis, and William Hawley; alternates: Edward FInkelstone and Mat. Altman. After the ruling of McMackin, Hawley and Wilzig resigned and the whole set of the delegates were re-elected a^ follows: delegates: Mat Altman, B. Davis, and Edward Finkelstone; alternates: Charles Les- ser and S. Prime. At a meeting on August 12 a communication was received from W. Hawley, chairman of the delegates to the County General Committee, stating that the Socialists had no standing in that body. Edward Bauke proposed that the resolutions condemning the action of John McMackin, which werfe passed by the 8th Assembly District organiza- tion, be adopted. The motion was carried. Davis suggested that effort be made to have the County General Committee hold a meet- ing before the delegates started for Syracuse. Hammond Miller, Samuel Gompers, F. Furtoch, and Featrock were nominated as candidates for delegates to the County General Com- mittee. W. Hawley tendered his resignation as delegate to Syracuse to which Sindler objected, saying that it ought to be understood that neither McMackin nor Henry George controlled the organization, but the workingmen themselves. Finkelstone said that the delegates represented the interests of the district and the labor interests, of the city. They had been legally elected to their position. He thought they might be locked out at Syracuse, and therefore, let the delegates resign and then re-elect them. Davis offered a resolution to the effect that the election of all the delegates be declared null and void. S. Gompers thought it would look like worked business to declare the action null and void. They must give reasons for such action. J. B. Lyons said that the organization must not give the convention a chance to throw them out. Sindler thought it would be just the same if they were re-elected. They had bteen elected legally, and were the properly authorized delegates." At the final meeting before the convention, on August 15, a resolu- tion was adopted demanding that the delegates vote as a unit: for the name of the United Labor Party; for a more radical platform stating that there cannot be any harmony between capital and labor and demanding the public ownership of the means of transportation "Leader, Aug 16, 1887, p. 2. [415] 170 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN and communication and the Instruments of production; if the above cannot be adopted, then, to vote for the Clarendon Hall Platform; and to vote for resolutions protesting against the ruling of McMackin. 15th Assembly District. Edward Conklin, president; delegates: Charles Brice, Edward Conklin, and J. F. Coughlin; alternates: P. Schaettgan, P. J. Hartford, and Thomas P. Conroy. 16th Assembly District. Germans organized; J. J. McGrath, chair- man of the English-speaking branch and H. C. Markuse, chairman of the German-speaking branch; delegates: Dr. M. B. Leverson, J. J. McGrath, and H. Markuse; alternates: James W. Sullivan, H. Emrich, and Frank Bleyer. At a meeting of the German branch on July 28 the committee which was appointed to c^onfer with the English branch reported that the latter had refused to recognize the former as being part of its membership, thus debarring the 175 German-speaking members from participating In the election of delegates to the convention. A com- mittee was appointed with the instructions to draw up a protest against the election of delegates by the English-speaking branch, such protest to be forwarded to the County General Committee for action. The same committee shall also call upon the English branch to ask them to hold a joint meeting for the purpose of electing delegates." At a meeting of the English-speaking branch on August 1, a com- munication from the German branch requesting that they be allowed to merge their branch into the regular association was received, and, after much debate, was laid over, pending the decision of the County General Committee. The decision of the County General Committee was sustained." At the next meeting of the German-speaking branch on August 11 a resolution was adopted condemning the County General Committee and the English-speaking branch of the 16th Assembly District or- ganization for not allowing the German-speaking branch with the membership of 175 to participate in election of delegates to the state convention." 17th Assembly District. J. H. McGee, chairman; at a meeting on July 13 were thirty new members proposed, three of whom were ad- mitted; when the name of the fourth was read, the chairman ruled that the same being a member of the Socialist Labor Party, could not be admitted as a member of the United Labor Party. This decision of the chair aroused the majority of the members present. A motion to impeach the chairman was made, whereupon the latter adjourned the meeting amid great excitement. At the next meeting on July 20 the following delegates were elected: » Leader, July 29, 1S87, p. 2. ^Leader, Aug. 10, 1887, p. 2. "Standard, Aug. 20. 1887, p. 3. Leader, Aug. 12, 1887, p. 2. [416] SPEEK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 171 James H. Magee, John A. Sullivan, and Robert Hamilton; alternates: Charles A. Young, Adolph Geltz, and John Savage. At a meeting on August 11 the ruling of McMackin was condemned." 18th Assembly District. Location of the St. Stephen's Parish; Ph. Kelly, chairman; delegates: John McMackin, Ph. J. Kelly, and Wm. J. Boy tan; alternates: J. J. Gahan, A. A. Levey, and Frank Taglibue. At a meeting on August 11 the delegates were Instructed to sup- port the Clarendon Hall Platform and oppose the changing of the party's name leaving out the word "Labor." The decision of Mc- Mackin was condemned." 19th Assembly District. Wm. P. O'Meara, chairman; delegates: William P. O'Meara, W. Anderson, and Frank Horn; alternates: P. H. Gardand, J. J. Murray, and Charles H. Mitchell. At a meeting on July 29, Wm. P. O'Meara, chairman, stated "that while he was not a Socialist and was opposed to their principles as being 'too mooney' and would never become one of them because 'he was not built that way,' he thought the Socialists ought to be admitted, and that mem- bership in the Socialist Labor Party" was, in his opinion no bar."*" A resolution approving the decision of the County Executive Com- mittee permitting the members of the Socialist Labor Party to be members in the United Labor Party was adopted.^ 20th Assembly District. Bohemians and Germans organized. Dele- gates: Hugh Whoriskey, Thomas F. Neill and Edward Murphy; alter- nates: Ernest Bohn, William Cowan, and Charles Ryan. At an ex- citing meeting on August 8 the resolution of the eighth Assembly District was adopted unanimously and the seventeen delegates to the County General Committee were instructed to vote for the re- consideration of the decision against the Socialists.^ 21st Assembly District. Dr. Gottheil, chairman; delegates: J. J. O'Brien, R. D. Hill, and A. R. Hamilton; alternates: John Kelley, Dr. W. S. Gottheil, and S. E. Phile. 22nd Assembly District. Besides the English-speaking organiza- tion, there was a strong German-speaking association. J. O'Dair, chairman and the main organizer of the district; delegates: James Redpath, W. J. O'Dair, and Charles Field; alternates: Thomas Walsh, Prof. Daniel De Leon, and Ernest Oldenbush. The German branch held a meeting on August 8. A resolution was adopted to call a special meeting on August 9 to protest against the decision of the County General Committee. Prof. De Leon declared that McMackin's decision was illegal; he ^standard, Aug. 20, 1887, p. 3. Leader, Aug. 8, 1887, p. 2. "JStomdard, Aug. 20, 1887, p. 3. Leader, Aug. 12, 18S7, p. 2. "Leader, July 30, 1887, p. 2. '^ Leader, Aug. 9, 1887, p. 2. [417] 172 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN also read a part of the minutes of the platform committee, from which It appears that at the time when the platform was under considera- tion, McMackln had conceded that the Socialist Labor Party was not a political organization.^ 27th Election District. Organization of the 22nd Assembly District Organization in a meeting on the same evening adopted a resolution condemning the antl-SocIalist decision of the County General Com- mittee. At a meeting of the Assembly District Organization, Archi- bald objected to the adoption of the minutes of the last meeting, but the minutes were adopted. Prof. Daniel De Leon then moved the adoption of a resolution in which it was stated that the decision of the County General Committee, excluding the Socialists from mem- bership in the United Labor Party was unjust and unconstitutional. De Leon declared that the action of the Central General Committee was shameful, hypocritical and dishonorable, and if redress was not immediately to follow, it would prove a death blow to the party of United Labor. Matthew Barr spoke against the resolutions with great fervor, moving to lay them upon the table. His motion was rejected by a vote of sixty-one against twenty-two. Norris Walsh, and Oldenbush having made short speeches, the resolutions were adopted by a vote of sixty-two against five. Herman Strelitz moved the adoption of a protest similar to the one adopted by the 8th Assembly District Organization. Oldenbush offered an amendment, instructing the entire delegation of the district to vote for a reconsideration of the anti-Socialist decision, and asking for a special meeting of the County Committee to be called before August 17. The motion was amended and adopted by a large majority.'" 23d Assembly District. Henry George's residence. C. F. Doody, chairman; delegates: Henry George, Fred C. Leubuscher, and Joseph Hess; alternates: A. J. Steers, C. F. Doody, and Jerome O'Neill. At a meeting on August 8, C. F. Doody presided. When A. J. Steers had made his report regarding the decision of Chairman Mc- Mackln against the Socialists, the chairman declared that the decision would be enforced in the 23d Assembly District. The chairman then asked all members of the Socialist Labor Party to retire. A large number of members, mostly German trades unionists, withdrew from the room, declaring that they would join the Socialists. A motion was then made to expel the members of the Central Labor Union and the Knights of Labor from the United Labor Party be- cause both named organizations had a Socialistic plank in their plat- forms and had nominated candidates for public ofBce, being political organizations in the same sense as the Socialist Labor Party. The ^Leader, Aug. 9, 1887, p. 2. >* Leader, Aug. 10, 1887, p. 2. [418] SPBBK— SINGLBTAX AND LlABOR MOVEMENT 173 chairman declared this motion out of, order because the named or- ganizations were not political. Another .motion was made to exclude the members of all Land and Labor Clubs, as they came also under Section 2, Art. I of the con- stitution. The chairman decided that It was superfluous to debate the question. A third motion to exclude the members of the Free Soil Club was also declared out of order. Mr. Joseph Hess resigned as delegate to the Syracuse convention.^ These motions were apparently introduced to ridicule the ruling of McMackin. At the final meeting before the state convention, a com- mittee from the 32d Election District headed by Baldwin, and repre- senting a large body of German brewers, presented a protest against the action of the Central General Committee in ousting the members of the Socialist Labor Party from the United Labor Party and asking the Assistant District Organizer to instruct its delegates to move for a reconsideration of the matter at the next meeting of the County General Committee. The protest declared that if the committee's action was not reviewed the 32d Election District Organization would refuse to pay dues, and would not take any active part in the party. This caused a very warm and exciting debate, in which some very bitter speeches were made by the opposing persons.™ The motion was vote^ down. Wilbur 0. Eastlake was then unani- mously elected in the place of Joseph Hess, a delegate who had re- signed. 24th Assembly District. Organized labor has a large membership of all nationalities in the assembly district. The sentiment in favor of Independent political action is equally strong among the Knights of Labor and the trade unionists. In the last campaign the most perfect harmony prevailed and since then nothing has occurred to disturb the feeling of mutual confidence which is so necessary to effective cooperation In politics. "By keeping in view such practical questions," continued Lucian Sanlal In his report to the County Gen- eral Committee, to which he was a delegate from the 24th Assembly District organization, "as the wage-system and the monopolization of the machinery of industry, through the study of which labor has been brought to Its present efficiency of organization, and from which it has evolved the theory of self-emancipation, undoubtedly correct, the state convention may aid us considerably In preserving harmony."" W. B. Ahrens was elected as chairman. Delegates: L. Sanlal, Louis Berlyn, and Charles F. Helley; alternates: C. G. Graves, J. Frank and L. Stumpf. At a meeting on August 11 the delegates were Instructed to sup- " Leader, Aug. 9, 1887, p. 2; Standard, Aug. 13, 1887, p. 1. "Leader, Aug:. 16. 1887, p. 2, col. 4. "Leader, July 2, 1887, p. 2. [419] 174 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSI^J port the Clarendon Hall Platform* At a final meeting before the state convention on August 16, a report of the action of the County- General Committee was made, at the conclusion of which Luclan Saiiial moved not to accept the part relating to the expulsion of the members of the Socialist Labor Party. Pbllach stated that he was opposed to the Socialists gathering in special meetings in order to adjust matters pertaining to the United Labor Party among them- selves, but he was also opposed to the exclusion of the Socialists as in that case a great many members of their clubs would, as a matter of consistency, have to be excluded. Franz Leib reported that John McMackin had always declared the credentials of the speakers to be in order, well knowing he was a member of the Socialist Labor Party, and had even ordered him to organize the district. The Socialists had been faithful workers at the polls and the most regular payers of dues, and no one had ever objected to them taking the greatest burden in the movement upon their shoulders. A motion was made and carried to instruct the delegates of the 24th Assembly District to the County General Committee to act as a unit in demanding the reconsideration of the ruling of McMackin." DELEGATES FROM THE KING'S COUNTY 1st. Assembly District: Martin Fallon, L. Flynn, and M. Denehy. 2nd. A. B. Brown, Alvln T. Walsh and Arthur Stafford. Alter- nates: Henry Lachmans, W. H. Dunard and C. E. Lee. 3rd. John D. Muir, James W. Webb and James Muhlstein. Alter- nates: Theodore Schmidt, W. J. O'Keefe and William McDonald. 4th. John V. Brown, Thomas M. Russell and Michael Jennings. Alternates: John Wallace, Michael Griffin and Edgar Cullen. 5th. August Pettinkoffer, J. M. Stanley and W. H. Russell. Alter- nates: John L. Malone, Robert Busby and Philip Gerhold. 6th. Joseph Warwick, W. G. Burke and Killan Van Lutz. Alter- nates: Charles Stoetzer, Thomas W. Brophy and John B. Hayes. 7th. James Bell, Jacob Kohlmeyer and Henry Beinheur. Alter- natives: John Kltchner, M. Selgel and Paul Josephs. 8th. George Smith, A. Pettinkoffer and J. Franz. Alternates: M. Kaiser, P. McCue and D. Mclntyre. 9th. E. J. Murphy, J. Quigley and R. Anderson. Alternates: R. H. Ellas, F. W. Abbott and Peter Hannlgan. 10th. P. D. Murray, V. A. Wilder and Charles Schalteuback. Al- ternatives: A. V. Brown, Thomas Seward and James Waters. ^Standard, Aug. 20, 1887, p. 2. ^Leader, Aug. 17, 1887, p. 2. [420] SPBBK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 175 11th. Gaybert Barnes, E. Ferguson and J. B. Kohler. Alternatives: John F. Luttrell, C. H. Matchett and Arthur Stafford. 12th. William Daumar, Andrew D. Best and John R. O'Donnell. Alternates: P. Constant, Michael Clark and Ed. J. Finley. DELEGATES FROM OTHER COUNTIES Richmond County: D. W. Clegg, Charles Koffer and W. E. Simkins. Alternates: William J. Correy, John H. Schilling and B. J. Clarke. Albany County: John McCabe, C. H. Barrett, August Kessler. Orange County: Land and Labor Club No. 3. Stephen Wolf. Al- ternates: C. M. Winchester, Port Jervis; C. N. Dedrick. Onondaga County: William D. Lippelt, William Joyce and Carl Ip- son. Alternates: Augu,st Heins, Fred Fiji and H. C. Kinman. 2nd. J. Steinmetz, J. A. Millen and Patrick Lawler. Alternates: Terrence O'Brien, Frank R. Skinner and John Dolan. 3rd. John Seitz, Evan J. Evans and John W. Eller. Alternates: John J. Jeckson, Henry Dana, and Charles Morgan. Cayuga County: 1st. R. G. Parker, H. W. Beredict and John Nolan. Alternates: John Enlaw, John Mahr and Conrad English. 2nd. Her- bert Pontain, A. McDonnough, and James Bowen. Alternates: E. W. Serring, F. Lill and P. Dougherty. Westchester County: New Rochelle Land and Labor Club: George Craft. Yonkers — ^Alexander S. Sutherland, Thomas J. Devine and Den- nis Nierney. Alternates: George F. Redder, Jacob Williams and John P. McCarthy. Erie County: 3rd. R. H. Ferguson, E. L. Altem, C. M. Kinskey, J. W. O'Neil and Oscar Carlson. Elmira County: Rufus B. Wilson. Ellenvllle: James P. Archibald, John J. Bealin. Buffalo: Richard J. Hlnton. Albany: Louis F. Post.'" ^Leader, Ausiist 16, 1887. p. 1. [421] 176 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN APPENDIX V* The resolution adopted by a mass meeting called by the Socialists on August 22, 1887, at the Cooper Union Hall. "Whereas, At the State Convention held in Syracuse by Henry George and his friends in the name of United Labor, admittance was denied to the regularly elected representatives of large constituencies, com- posed of wage-virorkers, while lawyers, politicians, landlords and capi- talists were fraudulently recognized as Labor delegates, their only title as such resting on their subserviency to the new political machine ; and, "Whereas, The said Convention, thus exclusively organized for the propagation of Henry George's theory and the political preferment of his henchmen, has presumed to issue in the name of United Labor, a platform that repudiates the tendencies and aspirations of the working classes throughout the civilized world, and, "Whereas, This platform is a substantial indorsement of Henry George's monstrous assumption in the fact of history and present con- ditions that 'There is no antagonism, between Capital and Labor,' thereby meaning the capitalist and the laborer, and, "Whereas, Consistently with this false premise Henry George, sus- tained by his convention, not only proclaims the natural justice, neces- sity and eternity of wage-slavery, but actually proposes to make the capitalist richer by exempting his possessions and profits from all public burdens, while wrongfully assuming that a simple Land Tax and absolute Free Trade must prove a cure-all for the stupendous evils of our perverse economic system, and "Whereas, The ticket nominated by the said convention is an addi- tional insult to the intelligence and feeling of the wage-earning class, which was entirely ignored by the state workers of the Syracuse machine, therefore, be it "Resolved, That we, workingmen of this city, in mass-meeting as- sembled, repudiate Henry George, his platform and his personal political machine, that we denounce his pandering to the hatreds and preju- dices of the capitalistic class in attempting to cast odium on that earnest body of wage-workers and advanced thinkers who for fifty years have fought the battles of humanity and progress on two con- tinents, that we call upon Organized Labor throughout the country to • Chap. IX, note 18. [422] SPBBK— SINGLETAX AND L.ABOR MOVEMENT 177 rescue the labor movement from the bosslsm of an ungrateful and narrow-minded theorist, whose past professions are plainly belled by his recent declarations and conduct. That until a new party Is formed, truly representative of the ultimate aims and present requirements of Labor, i. e., securing In practical measures the Immediate improve- ment of its condition, while keeping in view the abolition of the wage system and the substitution therefor of Cooperative Industry — ^we pledge ourselves to stand united against the political parties, in- cluding the George machine. "Resolved, That we call upon all Assistant District Organizations opposed to the Henry George ring within the United labor Party to each elect three delegates to a conference to be held on Sunday, Sep- tember 4, 1887, 9 A. M. at Webster Hall, East 11th between 3rd and 4th Ave., and in other districts we request all members similarly inclined to organize district leagues and likewise elect such delegates, and, further, we call upon all trade and labor organizations to each elect three delegates for such conference.'" ' '^ Leader, Aug. 23, 1887, p. 1. 178 BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN APPENDIX VI* THE PLATFORM OF THE PROGRESSIVE LABOR PARTY, 1887. "Whereas, Realizing the necessity of constant vigilance and united action, the various Trade organizations of the city of New York have established a representative body known as the Central Labor Union; and "Whereas, Their declared purpose, in so doing, was to assist each other in all struggles, political and industrial, against encroachments of a capitalistic oligarchy, hostile to Labor and destructive of Ameri- can liberty, and "Whereas, We hold within the Central Labor Union: "1. That the soil of every country is the social and common inherit- ance of the people. "2. That Labor produces all wealth, which includes the instruments through which alone the forces of nature become accessible. "3. That all should, therefore have free access to land and to the in- struments of production, without tribute to landlords and monopolies. "4. That there can be no harmony between Capital and Labor under the present industrial system, which either dwarfs or sup- presses individual development by denying to the masses of American people their inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happi- ness. "5. That the emancipation of the working classes must be achieved by the working classes themselves through the establishment, as de- manded by the Knights of Labor of cooperative institutions, such as will tend to supersede the wage system by the introduction of a co- operative industrial system, and "Whereas, The Central Labor Union, In pursviance of its object, has on several occasions, and notably last year entered the political neld; but "Whereas, the political agency of its own creation has been per- verted in its arms, adulterated in its composition, and converted into a despotic wing by the very candidate whom it had most honored and trusted; therefore, be it, "Resolved, That we representatives of Organized Labor in convention assembled re-afflrm the platforms of the Central Labor Union and the Knights of Labor. Chap. IX, note 28. [424] SPEEK— SINGLET AX AND LABOR MOVEMENT 179 "Resolved, That for the furtherance of the great American move- ment of the masses against the classes upon its natural lines, we con- stitute ourselves into an independent political body, under the name of 'Progressive Labor Party,' to bfe primarily and permanently con- trolled by the bona fide labor organizations, wage-workers and produc- ers, of the city, of the State and of the United States, through their accredited representatives. "Resolved, That with a view to the immediate relief of the people by the correction of glaring abuses and the suppression of the odious wrongs, we first demand: "That eight hours constitute a day's work. "Prohibition of child labor in all occupations. "Prohibition of female labor in occupations detrimental to health or morality. "Equal pay to both sexes for equal work. "Payment of wages weekly, in lawful money, and no more 'triick' pay. "First lien for workingmen's wages. "The enactment of juster laws for the liability of employers to em- ployes. "Abolition of the contract system in prisons and on public works. "Sweeping reform of the tenement-house system. "Abolition of the tenement-house cigarmaking and of all other tene- ment-house manufacturing. "Sanitary inspection of mines, factories, dwellings, and all condi- tions of labor. "Rigid enforcement of the law prohibiting the importation of foreign labor under contract. "Rigid enforcement of all existing beneficial labor laws. , "Equal adult citizenship and suffrage, without regard to sex. "Repeal of all blue laws. "Repeal of all conspiracy laws, tramp laws and all class legislation and privileges. "No Pinkertons; no armed bandits in the pay of capital. "Resolved, That with a view to progressive advance in the direction marked out by the above declaration of principles, we furthermore demand : "The public ownership and management of railroads, telegraphs, express and steamship lines, telephones, gas and water works, and all industries involving the use of public franchises, or the performance of public functions. "The direct issue of currency and money by the national treasury, without the intervention of banks. "And as a first step to the recovery of the national domain of the [425] 180 BULLETIN OP THE UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN people, we favor a special tax on unimproved land, sufficiently high to compel its improvement or its surrender to the community by the speculators who withhold it from use. "We favor also a tax on all incomes, so graduated as to bear most heavily upon the great incomes of the monopolistic classes and cor- porations, and thus materially lighten the burdens now borne by the workers, producers and masses of the people. "With the same end in view, we also favor the exemption from taxation of the average homesteads, farms, manufacturies, working- tools and properties under $5,000 in value occupied or productively used by the owners, and not rented out.'" ^Leader, Sept. 9, 1S87, p. 1. [426] VOLUME ni (Complete in two numbers, with, title-page and table of contents.) No. 1. The labor history of the Cripple Greek District, by Benjamia McKie Rastall. 1908. 166 p. 50 cents. ' No. 2. A congressional history of railways In the United States to 1850, by Lewis Henry Haney. 1908. 274 p. 50 cents. VOLUME rv (Complete in three numbers, with title-page and table of contents.) No. 1. Economic influences on educational progress in the United States, 1820-1850, by Prank Tracy Carlton. 1908. 136 p. 50 cents. No. 2. A financial and administrative history of Milwaukee, by Laur- ence Marcellus Larson. 1908. 182 p. 50 cents. No. 3. The indirect central administration of Wisconsin, by James Duff Barnett. 1908. Ill p. 25 cents. VOLUME V (Complete in three numbers, with title-page and table of contents.) No. 1. Knancial history of Kansas, by James Ernest Boyle. 1908. 178 p. 50 cents. No. 2. The labor argument in the American protective tariff discus- sion, by George Benjamin Mangold. 1908. 115 p. 35 cents. No. 3. The rise and decline of the wheat growing industry in Wiscon- sin, by John Giffin Thom-pson. 1909. 249 p. 50 cents. VOLUME VI (Complete in two numbers, with title-page and table of contents.) - No. 1. A congressional history of railways in the United States, 1850-1887, by Lewis Henry Haney. 1910. 326 p. 50 cents. No. 2. The most favored nation clause in commercial treaties, by Stanley Kuhl Hornbeck. 1910. 122 p. 40 cents. voLXJME vrr (Complete in three numbers, with title-page and table of contents.) — No. 1. The Knights of St. Crispin, a study in the Industrial causes of trade unionism, by Don D. Lescohler. 1910. 102 p. 40 cents. No. 2. The effects of industrial changes upon the status of women, by Theresa Schmid McMahon. 1912. 132 p. 25 cents. No. 3. The amalgamated wood workers international union of Amer- ica, by Frederick Shipp Deibler. 1912. 212 p. 25 cents. VOLUME vm No. 1. An economic analysis of the constitutional restrictions upon public indebtedness in the United States, by Horace Secrlst. 1914. 132 p. 40 cents. No. 2. The valuation of urban realty for purposes of taxation, with certain sections especially applicable to Wisconsin, by WIll- ; ford Isbell King. 1914. 114 p. 25 cents. I— No. 3, The singletax and the labor movement, by Peter Alexander Speek. 1917. 180 p. 25 cents. Cornell University Library HD 1313.S74 ... The singletax and the labor movement 3 1924 002 346 207