MASTER 
 
 NEGATIVE 
 NO. 94-821 34- 10 
 
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT 
 
 The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) 
 governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted 
 materials including foreign works under certain conditions. In addition, 
 the United States extends protection to foreign works by means of 
 various international conventions, bilateral agreements, and 
 proclamations. 
 
 Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are 
 authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these 
 specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be 
 "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research." 
 If a user makes a request for, or ater uses, a photocopy or reproduction 
 for purposes in excess of "fair use," that user may be liable for copyright 
 Infringement. 
 
 The Columbia University Libraries reserve the right to refuse to accept a 
 copying order If, In Its judgement, fulfillment of the order would Involve 
 violation of the copyright law. 
 
Author: 
 
 Marot, Helen 
 
 Title: 
 
 American labor unions 
 
 Place: 
 
 New York 
 
 Date: 
 
 1914 
 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 
 PRESERVATION DIVISION 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET 
 
 MASTER NEGATIVE « 
 
 ORIGINAL MATERIAL AS FILMED • EXISTING BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD 
 
 
 Marot, Helen. 
 
 American labor unions, by a member, Helen Marot ... 
 New York, H. Holt and company, 1914. 
 
 ix p., 1 I., 275 p. IPi*". [ $1J2S3 
 The reference notes of citations" : p. 266-269. 
 
 1. Trade-unions — U. S. 
 Library of Congress 
 Copy 2. 
 
 I. Title. 
 
 Copyright A 379778 
 
 g 
 
 Hr)6508.M3 
 
 14—17226 
 
 RESTRICTIONS ON USE: 
 
 FILM SIZE 
 
 : 35^ 
 
 \ 
 
 DATE FILMED 
 
 TRACKING # : 
 
 TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA 
 
 REDUCTION RATIO: 17-X. 
 
 IMAGE PLACEMENT: lA MIA) IB MB 
 
 :_kin\i± 
 
 INITIALS: 
 
 fh^H oitnL 
 
 FILMED BY PRESERVATION RESOURCES. BETHLEHEM. PA. 
 

 
 in 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 01 
 ff CD 
 
 3 X 
 
 »^ c/> 
 
 cjn 
 ^-< 
 
 00 NJ 
 
 O 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 > 
 W 
 
 o m 
 
 CD CD 
 
 ^ o o 
 
 X 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 A^^ 
 
 
 
 a^ 
 
 
 •? 
 
 * 
 
 A->*.> 
 
 
 X5 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 ^ 
 
 en 
 
 O 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 ^o 
 
 f^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 O 
 
 |"Ei5EEi;|5|; 
 
 o^ 
 
 00 
 
 s 
 
 to 
 
 
 1.0 mm 
 
 1.5 mm 
 
 2.0 mm 
 
 ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ 
 abcclefghi|l(lmnopqrstuvwxyzl234567890 
 
 ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ 
 abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzl234567890 
 
 ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ 
 
 abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz 
 
 1234567890 
 
 A^ 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 4^ 
 
 4^ 
 
 2.5 mm 
 
 ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ 
 
 abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz 
 
 1234567890 
 
 r. 
 
 
 
 fo 
 
 ¥* 
 
 fp 
 
 ^^ 
 
 m 
 
 H 
 
 O 
 O 
 
 ■om "o 
 
 > C w 
 X T i 
 
 0</) 5 
 
 m 
 
 30 
 O 
 
 m 
 
 
 ^ ^^A 
 
 ^/^f^ 
 
 C^'^^'^-€v 
 
 c^ 
 
 4^ 
 
 ^o 
 
 V 
 
 .^-^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 < 
 
 '^ 
 
 
 €8 
 
 I? 
 
 3 .— 
 
 E 
 
 si 
 
 00 IM 
 
 ip 
 
 f^ 
 
 l-» 
 
 l>0 
 
 CJ1 
 
 o 
 
 i 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 .^^. 
 
 cr 
 
 Wo 
 
 Is 
 °i 
 
 •D P 
 
 <o 
 |o 
 
 •< TO 
 N C/5 
 •-*— I 
 
 ^-< 
 OOISI 
 VD 
 O 
 
 >. 
 
 "^. 
 
 ^fo^ 
 
 
 S^' 
 
X- 
 
 "i"*' f-*^'-'-'- '".."' *'i'"v' *' !■'' , •'"■ 
 
 ^^ f^^m 
 
 '■■■ i^m 
 
 t-r-*? 
 
 
 '*-« 
 
 ;ll^fe' 
 
 
 
 --^-*-T). .j.^_» .f^. 
 
 AMERICAN 
 LABOR UNIONS 
 
 MAROT 
 
 ','• «v*r 
 
 
 
 
 ' y 
 
 1. ff'J;'-^. • fir*' i:. 
 
 
 #i.if"'*".' 
 
 
Columbia Winibtnitp 
 
 in tl)t €itp of Beta! f^ovk 
 
 LIBRARY C-^I^A 
 
 School of Business 
 
 iii 
 
 ml 
 mi 
 
 ^^ 
 
 I 
 
 **• 
 Vti. 
 
 if" 
 
 ^1 
 
ii 
 
 V 
 
 AMERICAN 
 LABOR UNIONS 
 
 BY A MEMBER 
 
 HELEN MAROT 
 
 Member of Local 12646 A. F. of L. j Executive Secretary of the Women'! 
 
 Trade Union League of New York 1905-1913 ; Author of "The 
 
 Handbook of Labor Literature*' 
 
 I 
 
 NEW YORK 
 HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 
 
 1914 
 
■MMSHMi 
 
 1 
 
 7 
 
 
 COPYKICBT. 1914. 
 SY 
 
 HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 
 
 Published August, 1914 
 
 iif-nn 
 
 T)at 
 
 •7 
 
 TA^^"^ 
 
 tNI OUINM « tOMll 00. MtM 
 
 RAMWAr. N. 4. 
 
 I„ 
 
 
 l\ 
 
 K 
 
 V 
 
 1, 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 For several years economists, social workers, and 
 magazine writers have done their part to bring the 
 labor problem, in many of its aspects, before the public 
 for impartial consideration. 
 
 I find that the cumulative force of recent labor 
 events has influenced some of these people to discour- 
 age the presentation of a point of view which is 
 characterized as distinctly labor. It is not that they 
 fail to recognize that there is a labor point of view, 
 but that militant tendencies within the labor movement 
 have alarmed them. 
 
 A one time friend of the labor unions, whose good 
 services had been frequently invoked when an inter- 
 mediary was needed for the settlement of a dispute 
 between capital and labor, told me it was his opinion 
 that the time had gone by for setting forth the labor 
 point of view. As a friend of labor he intended, he 
 said, to exert his energies in putting a stop to the 
 warfare which had developed. It was not, he said, 
 an understanding of the warfare that was needed, 
 but a suppression. 
 
 About the same time I learned from an economist, 
 who had given much time to the study of labor con- 
 ditions, and had formerly welcomed a full presenta- 
 
 111 
 
IV 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 tion of both sides, that it was a mistake to lay before 
 the people the labor controversy as interpreted or 
 viewed by organized labor. He took the position that 
 there is no labor side apart from the public side, and, 
 therefore, that there is no basis for a labor contro- 
 versy. He had decided that the time had come when 
 social reform would and should take the place of 
 the labor movement. 
 
 This man, I realized, had become partizan, — 
 partizan to a program, — and in his partizanship he 
 saw no room for the presentation of other programs 
 than those of a nature similar to his own. It hap- 
 pened that I, too, was partizan, but, unlike my friend, 
 I had been partizan for many years, and I have found 
 that clearly formulated programs presented by any 
 large section of the community, throw light on other 
 programs and clarify issues. 
 
 But from another point of view the partizan posi- 
 tion my friend had taken was important. It typified 
 the intensity of feeling which has centered around the 
 labor movement, and was another evidence of the 
 need of presenting the movement, in its several as- 
 pects, from the point of view of those most directly 
 concerned. 
 
 Any one who has followed the course of the labor 
 movement during the past five years, must realize 
 that it is the cumulative force of recent labor events 
 which is responsible for the intensity of outside in- 
 terest. The labor problem remained academic for 
 
 
 1 
 
 PREFACE v 
 
 those outside until the movement itself took on a more 
 determined and militant aspect. But advocacy of 
 pacific reform measures will not minimize interest in 
 what the organized workers are proposing as long as 
 the daily press reports the dramatic labor struggles 
 which follow each other in rapid succession. 
 
 Newspaper accounts, while stimulating public curi- 
 osity, do not give an idea of the movement 
 as a whole; the relation of its parts; the controlling 
 thoughts back of the general movement, and the varia- 
 tions in principles and methods. Neither do the valu- 
 able studies of single phases of the movement, the 
 studies which make up the literature of our labor 
 movement in America, give a picture of the movement 
 as a whole and the contrasting philosophies, methods, 
 and forms of organization. 
 
 ' This book undertakes to give the labor union point 
 of view of labor union policies and methods which 
 characterize the labor organizations of national repu- 
 tation. These policies and methods, even the forms 
 of organization adopted and advocated by each, are 
 based on certain " rights." To the workers these 
 rights are as real and as inevitable as any of the po- 
 litical or religious rights claimed and secured in 
 earlier times. 
 
 I have not tried to give the " impartial " view of 
 these rights, as presented at times by individual work- 
 ers, employers, or representatives of a general public. 
 I have tried, rather, to express the views of each or- 
 
VI 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 
 ganization and their own reasons for their line of 
 action. 
 
 In this book the labor use of terms has been fol- 
 lowed, as well as the labor point of view. I have not, 
 for instance, recognized the classroom distinction be- 
 tween the terms capitalist and employer. To labor, 
 these terms are interchangeable. They are not so 
 used in error or illiteracy, as it is often supposed. 
 Like most labor terms, they are true expressions of 
 the movements which they represent. The use of the 
 terms "capitahst'' and "employer" follows the 
 classification in labor union policy of excluding em- 
 ployers from membership in the unions. With a few 
 exceptions this distinction is made by all labor unions 
 whether radical or conservative. From the labor 
 union point of view it is not important that employers, 
 through direction and management, increase produc- 
 tion. The important point is that all employers are 
 representatives of capital and work in its interest; 
 their allegiance is, of necessity, to capital and not to 
 labor. This very difference in the phraseology of 
 labor and of the student of labor indicates an impor- 
 tant departure in point of view. 
 
 I have used the term labor union not to indicate, as 
 it often does, a mixed union, but to cover at once the 
 industrial and trade union. 
 
 Although every subject treated in this book has 
 been approached from the standpoint of organized 
 labor, I have not spoken for any one of the several 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 Vll 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
 groups of labor which hold opposing views as to 
 rights and methods. I hold no special brief for the 
 left or the right wing of the American Federation 
 of Labor, nor for the American Federation itself as 
 opposed to the Industrial Workers of the World, nor 
 for the Railroad Brotherhoods, independent of the one 
 or opposed to the other. 
 
 My object has been to interpret each one of these 
 organizations as it interprets itself, with this differ- 
 ence: I have noted the criticisms made by the dif- 
 ferent groups within the labor movement of each of 
 the others, when these criticisms deal with funda- 
 mental things. I have disregarded the differences 
 based on personal rivalry. The criticisms made by 
 one group of another are as much a part of the labor 
 movement to-day as are the established principles of 
 any one section. It is the disposition of all leaders 
 of all organized movements to regard divisions with- 
 in a movement as a sign of weakness. This is par- 
 ticularly true of the labor movement, whose universal 
 aim is unity. But there are members of organized 
 labor throughout the country who look on the criti- 
 cisms and even the divisions as signs of new life and 
 strength. They regard each group as an experiment 
 or trial in theories and methods for the overcoming 
 of labor's deadliest foe, — the apathy of labor itself. 
 Viewed in this light, the factions may be a promise 
 of approach toward an eventual unity of like interests 
 if not a solidarity of all labor. 
 
viii PREFACE 
 
 The total number of men, women, and children em- 
 ployed in gainful occupations, according to the United 
 States census of 1909, was 29,073,233. The number 
 of workers in each occupational group was as follows : 
 
 Agriculture 10,381,765 
 
 Professional Service 1,258,538 
 
 Domestic or Personal Service 5!58o!657 
 
 Trade and Transportation 4,y66,g6A 
 
 Manufacturing and Mechanical Pursuits 7,085^309 
 
 The President of the American Federation of 
 Labor, before a recent hearing of the Judiciary Com- 
 mittee of the United States Senate, pointed out that 
 the field in which the labor organizations operate is 
 confined to the last two groups, that is. Trade and 
 Transportation, and Manufacturing and Mechanical 
 Pursuits, which together numbered 11,852,273 work- 
 ers. 
 
 Taking no note of the members and adherents of 
 the Industrial Workers of the World and other in- 
 dependent groups, he stated that the membership of 
 the American Federation of Labor and the Railway 
 Brotherhoods together was about 2,500,000, or 18 
 per cent, of the workers eligible to membership in 
 labor organizations. If some 50,000 were added, to 
 include the members or adherents of all other labor 
 unions, there would still be left a large field for experi- 
 mentation in the theories and methods of working class 
 action. 
 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 IX 
 
 The membership alone is no indication of the act- 
 ual power of existing organization or of group action. 
 The simple facts that organizations do exist, and that 
 new ones may form at any moment, for purposes 
 either temporary or permanent, create a potential 
 force equal in ultimate results to the recognized ac- 
 complishments of the labor unions. The very rapidity 
 with which one labor event has followed another is 
 a measure of the potential power of organized labor. 
 While the rapid succession of events is making his- 
 tory old before the events can be recorded, the com- 
 parative values of the principles and methods preached 
 and practised, can be gaged as never before on ac- 
 count of their diversity and extended appeal. 
 
i 
 
 ft 
 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER 
 
 VIII. 
 IX. 
 
 Preface 
 
 I. Philanthropy and Labor Unions . 
 II. American Federation of Labor . 
 
 III. The Railroad Brotherhoods 
 
 IV. Industrial Workers of the World 
 V. Organization of Women . 
 
 VI. Industrial and Trade Organization . 
 VII. Sympathetic Strike Action 
 
 Union Recognition and the Union Shop 
 The Union Label .... 
 
 ' — X. The Boycott 
 
 -—XL Arbitration 
 
 - XII. Legislation and the Unions 
 
 XIII. The Conflict between Labor and the Courts 
 
 XIV. Violence 
 XV. Strikes and Violence 
 
 XVI. Sabotage 
 
 XVII. Limitation of Output. 
 XVIII. Scientific Management 
 XIX. Labor in Politics 
 XX. Direct Action 
 Appendix : 
 
 Directory of A. F. of L. National and International 
 Unions 
 
 I. W. W. Distribution of Unions by States and Ter- 
 ritories 
 
 Reference Notes of Citations 
 
 Index 
 
 PACK 
 
 • • • 
 
 111 
 
 I 
 
 II 
 
 29 
 
 48 
 
 65 
 
 78 
 
 112 
 120 
 129 
 136 
 148 
 162 
 180 
 188 
 200 
 
 215 
 222 
 230 
 
 249 
 
 255 
 
 261 
 266 
 271 
 
■MM 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 PHILANTHROPY AND LABOR UNIONS 
 
 Philanthropic movement— Difference between the two move- 
 ments, m aim and methods— No question of rivalry- 
 Difference between benevolent and self-imposed measures 
 ^Ui bureaucracy.'"'' "°' ^^-extensive with democracy but 
 
 It is a policy on the part of the most liberal of social 
 reformers to include labor unions as far as possible 
 in their many schemes for general social uplift. They 
 regard the movements which they initiate for labor 
 and labor's own movements as common agencies for 
 improving the material conditions surrounding indus- 
 try as well as the lives of the workers themselves. 
 The eflFort of the many agencies and the improved 
 conditions constitute the forces of a "New De- 
 mocracy '' or are, rather, the new democracy itself.^ 
 These agencies are, indeed, not confined to any class ; 
 they include employers, and they draw their moral 
 and financial support from large and small capitalists. 
 There are employers who are building sanitary work- 
 shops and developing elaborate schemes of welfare 
 work; women's clubs and consumers' leagues ai^e 
 
 *For Notes, see end of volume. 
 
I' 
 
 2 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 actively engaged in regulating the working hours of 
 women and children by legislative enactments; asso- 
 ciations for labor legislation are helping to secure 
 compensation for injured workmen and state regula- 
 tion of dangerous trades; safety committees have 
 forced the enactment of fire protection laws. The 
 churches, social settlements, Christian and Hebrew 
 associations, clubs for working women, and clubs for 
 working men offer nation-wide opportunities to men 
 and women of leisure, of professional and technical 
 training, of wealth, of social position, and political 
 influence to share some of their good fortune and to 
 help in the general effort to better the lives of the 
 men, women, and children who are without the assets 
 of an enriched existence. 
 
 Social service has become a profession. Experts 
 in service are developed through schools of philan- 
 thropy and special university courses. The movement 
 has passed, indeed, through stages of organized giv- 
 ing of the rich to the poor to extensive surveys and 
 investigations into the condition of the poor for the 
 enlightenment of those who help in the administra- 
 tion of their lives and conditions of work. We seem 
 to be on the eve of witnessing the inauguration and 
 administration of such service by capital and by the 
 
 state. 
 
 The whole movement received an epoch-making 
 impulse in 1912 and became a national issue in poli- 
 tics. Theodore Roosevelt, twice President of the 
 
 PHILANTHROPY AND LABOR UNIONS 3 
 
 United States and candidate for a third term at a 
 convention of a new party of his making, received 
 from Jane Addams, the most eminent prophet of the 
 new social spirit, the armor of its aspirations. His 
 cry at the convention, " We stand at Armageddon and 
 battle for the Lord," was a promise to thousands of 
 hard working reformers that their dreary years of 
 effort were to be crowned with victory. 
 
 Theories underlying the movements for labor re- 
 form were well developed before they became a na- 
 tional political issue. For many, the movements were 
 the expression of pure benevolence. Others dis- 
 counted the philanthropic impulse or spirit as a basis 
 for extensive reform and approached the problem of 
 devastation wrought by tuberculosis, industrial fatigue, 
 poison, accident, and death of workers less from a 
 sense of pity than from a sense of the economic and 
 social waste. And as social waste and bad business 
 it has been recognized at last by the philanthropist as 
 well as the statesman. Efforts had been made for 
 many years to persuade capital that industrial fatigue 
 and disease did not pay, even in terms of profit. Capi- 
 tal in various quarters recognized the point before 
 industrial betterment became a political issue. Lead- 
 ing economists had successfully inculcated the theory 
 among their followers that every industrial advance 
 of labor is bound up with a continued and a progres- 
 sive prosperity on the capital side. Every concession 
 to labor involved an equivalent return to capital. 
 
MM 
 
 4 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 There are leaders of trade unions who seem to 
 support this theory; but, leaving the leaders out of 
 account for the present, the theory or the position 
 is either instinctively or consciously opposed by the 
 rank and file. Boldly stated, the position of the labor 
 unionist is less work and more pay. Whether labor 
 does or does not make an equivalent return for what 
 capital concedes in wages; whether it pays or does 
 not pay disastrous prices for the gains it calls its 
 own, are questions of first importance, but they have 
 nothing to do with the difference between the atti- 
 tude of the labor unionist and the reformer. This 
 difference in attitude is the first point of estrange- 
 ment between them. The unionist knows that less 
 work and more pay sounds like robbery to the re- 
 former, as it does to the capitalist and the politician. 
 The reformer's formulation of the case is more pay, 
 more work, and better returns to capital. It may 
 work out that way, but it does not sound straight as 
 a union proposition. The unionist knows that he 
 does not expect to give more or as much; that the 
 very essence of his fight is that he gives too much. 
 If the economist can prove to the satisfaction of 
 every one that the capitalist will get more out of 
 labor by giving more, well and good ; but the unionist 
 is not comfortable in alliance with those who talk 
 that way. 
 
 The reformer or the statesman, moreover, lays em- 
 phasis on reforms which to labor are secondary in 
 
 PHILANTHROPY AND LABOR UNIONS 5 
 
 importance. Sanitary factories, fire-drills, safety de- 
 vices, healthful processes of manufacturing, are re- 
 forms of obvious benefit to the workman; they are 
 amendments to industrial conditions which capital, 
 with sufficient persuasion, can be induced to make. 
 But the dangers from bad sanitation, from fire and 
 special diseases of occupation are, to the working 
 man, only a few of the countless forces against which 
 he is struggling. 
 
 In comparison with the under- feeding, insufficient 
 clothing, and housing of his family, which are pressing 
 and immediate necessities, the other dangers which 
 occupy the thoughts of reformers are to the union man 
 merely speculative. He is too absorbed in keeping 
 up living standards at home to be seriously concerned 
 with the reforms of the workshop. Moreover, the 
 average workman has no very lively expectation of 
 the benefits received through state action ; they are to 
 him in the nature of vague promises. It is his expe- 
 rience that the adjustment of his vital interests de- 
 pends on his own efforts. The labor unionist realizes 
 this more fully than the common run of workers. He 
 realizes that the shorter hours and higher wages which 
 he has enjoyed have come through the direct and col- 
 lective efforts of himself and his fellow workers. As 
 labor union records show, the unions are responsible 
 for a mass of legislation, but the hopes and the ef- 
 forts of two and a half million organized workers 
 center rather around the regulation which they are 
 
 
6 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 able to impose on industry through their various 
 methods of direct action. 
 
 But on other grounds the labor unionist, if he is 
 just a union member and not a well-seasoned official, 
 is not at home with the industrial reformer. Union- 
 ists have joined with their fellow workers to gain not 
 only better terms of work and existence: their union 
 is their declaration of independence. It bears the 
 same relation to industrial life that other declara- 
 tions of independence have borne to political life. 
 Workingmen who do not join unions, consciously or 
 tacitly, accept a position of inferiority; they virtually 
 acknowledge their unfitness to direct or take part in 
 matters of vital concern to them, their incapacity for 
 judgment in what affects most directly their life of 
 work and life of leisure. The labor unionist resents 
 this position of fellow wage-earners. The men who 
 join unions have a developed consciousness of their 
 own manhood, and their membership in a union is a 
 sign to the community at large, no less than it is to 
 the employers, that they consider themselves capable 
 of directing their affairs and determining their in- 
 terests. 
 
 Moreover, when labor men join with reformers in 
 a common effort to change this or that condition, it is 
 their invariable experience that, even though the re- 
 formers' methods of attack do not differ from their 
 own, the reformers dominate and the labor men are 
 in the position, anomalous to them, of being auxiliaries 
 
 PHILANTHROPY AND LABOR UNIONS 7 
 
 to others concerned with the administration of labor 
 affairs. Labor unionists instinctively resist the domi- 
 nation of the reformer as they have deliberately re- 
 sisted the domination of the employer. They are em- 
 barrassed by the good intentions of the new domina- 
 tion but unable to meet it. They accept positions 
 of vice-presidents while the reformers assume, quite 
 naturally, the positions of presidents. The reformer is 
 equipped for the campaign with a sort of training and 
 experience which is not labor's and with which labor is 
 unfamiliar. The reformers formulate their theories 
 and observations of labor conditions with a marvelous 
 precision which they can execute precisely because they 
 are impersonal. They can formulate and execute their 
 propositions without any of the inhibiting influences 
 which enter into affairs of personal concern. 
 
 But for the unionist who is invited to cooperate in 
 the execution, the propositions are filled with personal 
 import; there is something strange and unreal about 
 the precision with which they are handled by the 
 expert reformer. The unionist has his inhibitions. 
 He has not the habit of formulation. He is not 
 practised in directing others. Cases may be cited 
 where labor leaders have dominated a common move- 
 ment made up of all sorts of citizens, but they are 
 exceptions. The common relation and the common 
 attitude is as I have described it. Reformers recog- 
 nize their advantageous position, and they make stren- 
 uous effort to cover up inherent differences, but labor 
 
8 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 PHILANTHROPY AND LABOR UNIONS 
 
 is more sensitive to the differences than the reformer, 
 and the efforts to make labor comfortable under such 
 circumstances are not strikingly successful. It is un- 
 fair to cite cases where labor representatives dominate 
 a movement of citizens, if it is intended to Wind others 
 to the usual position in which labor finds itself either 
 when it enters movements initiated by reformers or 
 where reformers enter the labor movement. 
 
 But this being the case, the reformer asks what 
 difference does it make? Is not the elimination of 
 industrial evils the all-important point ? The families 
 of wage-earners are suffering from illness, unemploy- 
 ment, under-feeding, and bad housing. What differ- 
 ence is there between one agency and another, except 
 their ability to combat these evils? What difference 
 does it make who secures compensation for the family 
 of a workingman injured while at work, if it is se- 
 cured ? What difference is there between the protec- 
 tion of factory workers against fire whether secured 
 by a safety committee of citizens or by a union? Does 
 not a pension for the sick, the aged, or the unemployed 
 buy food or pay rent, whether secured by sociologists 
 or by labor unionists? Does not an eight-hour day 
 give a woman worker the same leisure if it is granted 
 at the instigation of a woman's club or a woman's 
 union ? 
 
 There is no question of rivalry between the re- 
 form movements and the labor unions. Industrial 
 devastation is wide and deep. Many movements of 
 
 
 national scope operate without crossing. But the dif- 
 ference between labor's activity in its own behalf and 
 the activity of others in labor's interest is not only a 
 matter of results. Immediate results may be served 
 in either case, but whenever labor attacks the evils 
 which beset it, new power is created. Labor reforms 
 initiated outside of labor unions are, in their adminis- 
 tration, left to state agents or experts. State admin- 
 istration is conspicuously inadequate, incapable, and 
 indifferent. Experts can successfully handle inani- 
 mate things, but the fundamental interests of men 
 are neither successfully nor finally directed from 
 above. A successful administration of labor measures 
 requires labor's own constant, determined interest and 
 attention. No one can fail to realize the truth of this 
 who compares the efficiency of administration of labor 
 union measures within a trade or industry and state 
 labor measures depending on the inspection of state 
 officials. Benevolently imposed measures are weak 
 substitutes for those which are self-imposed and ad- 
 ministered. 
 
 No one doubts that measures for industrial better- 
 ment, as they are initiated by philanthropists or by 
 capital, and administered by experts or state officials, 
 will make large contributions toward minimizing 
 physical waste and disease in modern industry. It is, 
 indeed, a movement for sanitation and conservation. 
 Its full realization would give clean homes, healthy 
 children, and efficient workers. But class-conscious 
 

 I !1 
 
 M • 
 
 lO 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 labor wants much more. It wants citizenship in in- 
 dustry. It is no more willing to submit to the rule 
 of the beneficent and efficient than were the American 
 colonists willing to submit to the rule of the British 
 Parliament. Labor would rather be free than clean. 
 
 The reform movement is not co-extensive with 
 democracy but with bureaucracy. The labor unions 
 are group efforts in the direction of democracy. Like 
 the political efforts in the same direction, they become 
 many times stultified and lead up blind alleys. But 
 the effort creates power. While the economic gains 
 are themselves important and are measures of strength, 
 the significance of the labor union is its assertion of 
 the manhood of labor. The labor unionist, who has 
 no theory in regard to the class struggle, is often the 
 most class-conscious of workingmen. His class-con- 
 sciousness is his innate self-respect extended to his class 
 and intensified in his resentment against the position- 
 which society assigns the worker. 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR 
 
 Effort to establish its theory of partnership relations with capi- 
 tal — Variations in purpose and methods within the Federa- 
 tion—Minority sentiment— Methods of organization— Fed- 
 eral character— Conventions— International unions— Varia- 
 tions in policies and government, autonomy, disciplinary 
 powers— Local unions— Departments— Executive councils- 
 State and city branches. 
 
 The theory of the American Federation of Labor, 
 upheld by its national representatives and a majority 
 of its local officers, is that the inevitable dependence 
 of capital on labor and labor on capital creates a 
 moral obligation of partnership relations. 
 
 The American Federation of Labor was organized 
 thirty-three years ago to secure, through the method 
 of collective bargaining, a " fair share " in the part- 
 nership — a share which capital had failed to grant 
 the workers as individuals. 
 
 The Federation claimed that labor*s share in a part- 
 nership of natural or mutual interests gives it a " right 
 to a voice " in determining what is a " fair share " or 
 dividend. As organized groups of workers have de- 
 manded a voice in the fixing of their share in the 
 wealth produced, they have been met with the in- 
 variable answer from capital, " It is none of your 
 
 II 
 
 mmm 
 
i! 
 
 12 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 business/' or "I shall run my business to suit my- 
 self." 
 
 The preamble to the Constitution of the American 
 Federation of Labor reads: 
 
 A struggle is going on in all the nations of the 
 civilized world between the oppressors and the oppressed 
 of all countries, a struggle between the capitalist and the 
 laborer, which grows in intensity from year to year, and 
 will work disastrous resuhs to the toiling millions if 
 they are not combined for mutual protection and benefit.^ 
 
 For thirty-three years the Federation has worked 
 persistently to realize the partnership relations. It 
 has made every friendly and peaceful alliance which 
 has opened to it, notably its alliance with the National 
 Civic Federation, which is made up of representatives 
 of labor and capital. Such coercive action as strikes 
 and boycotts the American Federation justifies on the 
 ground that war is better than oppression and that 
 oppression is as much a part of autocracy in the indus- 
 trial world as it is, or ever was, in the political. It 
 is quite impossible to follow or understand the methods 
 of the American Federation without keeping in mind 
 that every coercive act is performed in the hope of 
 establishing a permanent and peaceful partnership. 
 
 The national representatives of the Federation have 
 adhered to this clear-cut policy.* As there is, however, 
 a large provision for home rule within the interna- 
 tional organizations of the Federation, the theory and 
 policy of the parent organization varies in application. 
 ♦ See note at end of chapter, p. 28. 
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR 13 
 
 It is important, therefore, to discover the tendencies 
 of each affiliated organization. 
 
 In many of the local and national unions, modifica- 
 tions are evident in the attitude of the members to- 
 ward the basic theory of partnership relations be- 
 tween capital and labor. 
 
 A vote, which may be considered as a test, 
 taken at the 19 12 convention of the American Fed- 
 eration, fixed the Socialist sentiment as one-third of 
 the delegation. The vote was on the election of a 
 
 president. 
 
 The minority vote was cast by the delegates from 
 the Western Federation of Miners, the majority of 
 the delegates from the United Mine Workers, and the 
 Machinists, from the Brewery Workers, and the 
 Journeymen Tailors, together with votes of single 
 delegates from other organizations. The delegates 
 from the Western Federation of Miners were em- 
 phatic in their position. They explained that they 
 had no choice in the matter, that their members ap- 
 proved of a continued affiliation with the Federation 
 for just so long a time as they could successfully make 
 headway against the conservative or " capitalistic " 
 policies of the American Federation. 
 
 But the strongest contrasts between unions within 
 the Federation do not follow nominal Socialist lines. 
 The sharpest divisions, those which are most per- 
 sistent and clear cut, are between unionists who stand 
 for tmcompromising class action, and those who ad- 
 
14 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 vocate propitiatory measures in the relation between 
 capital and labor. There are delegates, non-Socialists, 
 as well as Socialists, who take opposing positions on 
 class action in all the conventions, — the conventions 
 of the American Federation, of the international 
 unions and the state federations, and in the weekly 
 meetings of the city central organizations. 
 
 The strongest trade union non-Socialist representa- 
 tives of San Francisco, those who have the most in- 
 fluence in labor councils, declare with pride that in 
 San Francisco they are for labor, right or wrong. 
 They recognize no trade or industrial obligation above 
 their allegiance to fellow unionists or to labor. They 
 consider that their contract to stand by labor comes 
 first and takes precedence over all contracts made 
 with capital. 
 . At the Rochester convention of 1912, Max Hayes, 
 one of the Socialist leaders, and a member of the 
 Typographical Union, declared that he stood 
 by the policy of his union which upheld its 
 contracts with employers at any cost. He was 
 speaking to the question of the price of a 
 lost strike which the Pressmen had been forced 
 to pay for the good faith which the Typo- 
 graphical Union had maintained with the Newspaper 
 Association of Employers. The Chicago Federation 
 of Labor, representing the American Federation 
 unions of Chicago, stood by the Pressmen and con- 
 demned the Typographical Union. There are other 
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR 15 
 
 city central organizations besides those of Chicago 
 and San Francisco which have made such decisions 
 when the obligations to fellow unionists and contracts 
 with employers were in conflict. 
 
 The usual method of organization of the Federation 
 is along craft or trade lines. It undertakes to meet the 
 inter-dependence or overlapping of one craft on an- 
 other through its scheme of federation. But its fed- 
 eration plan makes no special provision for simulta- 
 neous or sympathetic action between the unions of re- 
 lated trades, as in times of strikes. The solidarity it 
 realizes through federation serves disciplinary and 
 organization purposes within the membership. Its 
 purpose is to force concessions from the employers 
 of separate trades, not to make war on capital as a 
 whole. 
 
 This federal organization of labor has located its 
 headquarters in the nation's capital, with a President, 
 Vice-President, National Executive Council, and De- 
 partments. There are forty-two state organizations 
 chartered by the Federation, and six hundred and 
 twenty-three city organizations. But it is not the 
 state or city organizations which form the basis of 
 the Federation. The Federation centers round the 
 one hundred and eleven national and international 
 unions which it charters for the purpose of organizing 
 the workers of the country, not geographically, but by 
 trades, throughout the United States and Canada. 
 These national or international unions are supple- 
 
i6 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 b ti 
 
 mented by six hundred and forty-two local trade and 
 federal labor unions chartered directly by the National 
 Executive Council of the Federation. 
 
 A convention of the American Federation of Labor 
 is held annually. It is made up of delegates from all 
 the chartered unions, who pass on business of inter- 
 est to the Federation as a whole and to the affiliated 
 organizations. At these conventions the officers and 
 Executive Council are elected for the following year. 
 The Federation is supported by a per capita tax levied 
 on all the chartered unions. 
 
 The one hundred and ten national, or, as they 
 are usually called, international unions, chartered by 
 the Federation, are given jurisdiction over organiza- 
 tion within prescribed trade or industrial lines. 
 
 These international unions in turn issue charters to 
 local unions, giving them the right to organize the 
 workers within a prescribed locality, coming under 
 the jurisdictional provisions of the international char- 
 ter. There are 20,046 local unions chartered by the 
 internationals. A local union is known by a number, 
 as Local Union 25 of the International Ladies' Gar- 
 ment Workers. The local unions pay a per capita tax 
 in support of the international unions. 
 
 The laws governing the election of officers, the 
 duties of officers, the holding of conventions,, the fix- 
 ing of dues and initiation fees, the terms of contract- 
 ing or bargaining with employers, as well as organiza- 
 tion actually accomplished, are determined by each 
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR 17 
 
 international union. Once in possession of the char- 
 ter the autonomy of an international union is complete, 
 so long as it does not encroach on territory assigned 
 another international. 
 
 Within its assigned field it may organize every 
 worker or it may lie down on its job. The Federa- 
 tion, by its own laws, may grant no other group of 
 workers a charter in the same field so long as the 
 original organization observes the requirements of its 
 charter, and pays its per capita tax. It considers any 
 other group which operates in the same field, a " dual," 
 that is, a rival organization, and inimical to the in- 
 terests of unity. 
 
 The international unions, on the other hand, allow 
 their local unions a minimum of home rule, and are 
 directly responsible for the failure or success of a 
 local, as well as for the extent of the organization of 
 the trade within a locality. 
 
 The character of the internationals varies as to 
 method and forms, as well as to principles of action. 
 The Typographical Union, for instance, is a genuine 
 craft organization, after the general policy of the 
 American Federation of Labor, while the United 
 Mine Workers' Union, the largest of all the unions of 
 the American Federation, is industrially organized, in- 
 cluding every worker in or around the mines in one 
 union.' 
 
 The label method of organization, explained in an- 
 other chapter, is used exclusively by some unions, — 
 
i8 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 
 it is discarded or deprecated by others, although the 
 Federation urges all of its allied unions to adopt it. 
 
 Again, on the question of political action, the in- 
 ternationals take opposing positions. Some of the 
 unions support the policy recommended by the Fed- 
 eration,~that the unions enter into an active, non- 
 partizan, pro-trade union campaign, supporting that 
 one of the dominant parties which stands for trade 
 union measures. Other unions oppose this policy and 
 take no part in politics. Still others work for the 
 election of candidates on a Socialist ticket, and urge 
 the Federation to support exclusively Socialist Party 
 candidates. 
 
 While it is the invariable policy of the international 
 unions to establish if possible partnership relations 
 with employers, they vary in their expressions of 
 confidence in the mutuality of interests. The Boot 
 and Shoe Workers' Union, for instance, look to the 
 boot and shoe manufacturers to employ trade union 
 members as agents to advertise their label and their 
 label goods; they request the manufacturers to sup- 
 port a trade union member as joint agent for the 
 union and manufacturers at Washington to insure 
 the passage of tariff legislation which they consider 
 of like importance to capital and labor. The Leather 
 Workers, on the other hand, refuse to cooperate with 
 the manufacturers in securing tariff legislation. They 
 say that the tariff is of no interest to labor, and that 
 all benefit from a protective tariff goes to capital. In 
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR 19 
 
 support of their position they quote the manufacturers 
 themselves, who stated before Congress that tariff on 
 leather is for the protection of capital, and that it has 
 nothing to do with wages; that "they (labor) have 
 gone through blood to get their increase in wages." * 
 While this allowance for differences in policy gives 
 each international organization full opportunity for 
 individual expression, the American Federation, ac- 
 cording to its own constitution, has no power to check 
 the domination of the international unions over their 
 own local unions. That is, the actual membership 
 of the Federation is not protected from the evils of 
 centralized power. The international organizations 
 undertake to make and keep the policy of their locals 
 uniform. With a few exceptions they have been suc- 
 cessful in this. Although this adds to the difficulty 
 of reshaping policies, the changes which do occur, 
 invariably originate within local unions. The local 
 unions, with a keen and active membership, have 
 reversed the traditions and practices of their interna- 
 tionals. But it is not always within the power of a 
 rebellious membership to affect the character of their 
 organization. The large amount of autocratic power 
 reserved by the internationals makes membership rule 
 difficult, and, at times, impossible. At any time the 
 international may withdraw the charter of a rebellious 
 local and form a new local, leaving the old to operate 
 as a dual organization. Locals find their wings ef- 
 fectually clipped under such circumstances. The whole 
 
 f 
 
20 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 » 
 
 of the American Federation of Labor is against them. 
 There is a provision in the Constitution of the Fed- 
 eration which reads : 
 
 No Central Labor Union, or any other central body 
 of delegates, shall admit to or retain in their councils 
 delegates from any local organization that owes its al- 
 legiance to any other body, National or International, 
 hostile to any affiliated organization, or that has been 
 suspended or expelled by, or not connected with, a Na- 
 tional or International organization of their trade here- 
 inafter affiliated, under penalty of having their charter 
 revoked for violation of their charter, subject to appeal 
 to the next convention.* 
 
 This means to a local union that the displeasure of 
 the parent organization, and the withdrawal of local 
 charters, place it outside the pale. In times of strike 
 such locals are refused their only means of support, 
 the backing of organized labor. Their strikes are not 
 recognized as strikes, and the places of strikers may 
 be filled by members of the American Federation of 
 Labor. Within this provision lies the disciplinary 
 power of the Federation of Labor, which is seldom 
 broken except by city central bodies like the Chicago 
 Federation of Labor and San Francisco Labor Council, 
 which are stronger at times in their influence than an 
 international organization. 
 
 As has been explained, the national unions of the 
 Federation are divided into what are called local 
 unions. There are also local unions affiliated directly 
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR 21 
 
 with the Federation without allegiance to an in- 
 ternational union. In trades where no internationals 
 exist, the Federation grants charters to organizations 
 of eleven or more workers of a trade in one locality. 
 These are also called local unions. When seven or 
 more of these locals desire consolidation, they make 
 application to the Federation, which withdraws the 
 individual charters and issues a charter to an interna- 
 tional union, which re-issues individual charters to 
 the locals which formed it. 
 
 In localities where there are not enough wage- 
 earners in any one trade to organize as a local trade 
 union, or where there are not enough who desire or- 
 ganization, workers of miscellaneous trades are 
 grouped together in what the Federation calls Federal 
 Labor Unions. There are six hundred and forty-two 
 of these Local Trade and Federal Labor Unions. 
 
 For many years the strength of the American Fed- 
 eration has been sapped by what are commonly known 
 as jurisdiction fights. The international unions are 
 still appealing to the Federation, which prescribes the 
 boundaries of each, to decide on the question of dis- 
 puted territory. These disputes have consumed a large 
 part of the time of the national conventions, the time 
 of the national officers, they have at times seriously 
 interfered with the progress of organization of work- 
 ers, and they have developed an attitude of hostility 
 between union and union which has affected the 
 solidarity of the movement. 
 
 Wt 
 
 \v 
 
SI: 
 
 :.i 
 
 22 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 It was for the purpose of unity that the departments 
 were created. These departments are made up of 
 representatives from national unions which are closely 
 alhed by the nature of the trades they represent. It 
 IS mtended that the disputes which arise between the 
 unions of related trades shall be taken up and disposed 
 Of, so far as possible, by the department in which 
 they are represented. The departments represent 
 on y those national unions which care to affiliate 
 with them and which are chartered by the Federation. 
 The Building Trades Department includes- 
 
 Asbestos Workers 
 
 Bridge and Structural Iron 
 
 Carpenters 
 
 Cement Workers 
 
 Electrical Workers 
 Elevator Constructors 
 Steam Engineers 
 Granite Cutters 
 Hod Carriers 
 Wood Wire Weavers 
 
 Machinists 
 
 Marble Workers 
 
 Sheet Metal Workers 
 
 Painters 
 
 Plasterers 
 
 Plumbers 
 
 Roofers 
 
 Slate and Tile Workers 
 
 Stone Cutters 
 
 Tile Layers, etc 
 
 The Metal Trades Department includes: 
 
 Sheet Metal Workers 
 Blacksmiths 
 
 Boiler Makers and Iron Ship- 
 builders 
 Electrical Workers 
 Engineers 
 Machinists 
 
 Molders 
 
 Metal Polishers, Buffers, and 
 
 Platers 
 Pattern Makers 
 Plumbers and Gasfitters 
 Stove Mounters 
 
 The Railroad Employees' Department includes 
 
 Machinists 
 
 Boilermakers and Iron Ship- 
 builders 
 
 Blacksmiths 
 
 Sheet Metal Workers 
 
 Railway Carmen 
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR 23 
 
 Plumbers, Gasfitters, 
 
 Steamfitters 
 Electrical Workers 
 
 and Railway Qerks 
 Steam Shovelmen 
 Switchmen 
 
 The Mining Department includes: 
 Federation of 
 
 The Western 
 
 Miners 
 Iron, Tin and Steel Workers 
 
 The United Mine Workers 
 Steam Shovelmen 
 
 The Union Label Trades Department proposes to 
 unify and extend the union label method of organiza- 
 tion. The following unions use a label or card which 
 stands for a particular trade and is granted to the 
 manufacturers of the trade, who observe the condi- 
 tions required by the union. Thirty-eight of the fol- 
 lowing fifty-seven international unions, using a label 
 or card, are represented in the Union Label Trades 
 Department : 
 
 American Federation of Labor 
 
 Bakers and Confectioners 
 
 Barbers 
 
 Bill Posters and Billers 
 
 Boilermakers 
 
 Blacksmiths 
 
 Bookbinders 
 
 Boot and Shoe Workers 
 
 Brewery Workmen 
 
 Brickmakers 
 
 Broom-makers 
 
 Brushmakers 
 
 Carpenters and Joiners 
 
 Carriage and Wagon Workers 
 
 Cigarmakers 
 
 Goth Hat and Capmakers 
 
 Coopers 
 
 Garment Workers (men's) 
 
 Garment Workers (women's) 
 
 Glass Workers 
 
 Glove Workers 
 
 Grinders and Finishers 
 
 Hatters 
 
 Horseshoers 
 
 Hotel Workers 
 
 Jewelry Workers 
 
 Lathers 
 
 Laundry Workers 
 
 Leather Workers 
 
 Lithographers 
 
 Machine Printers 
 
 Machinists 
 
 Marble Workers 
 
 Metal Polishers 
 
 Metal Workers 
 
 Molders 
 
 Painters 
 
 Papermakers 
 
24 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 '» ' 
 
 Photo Engravers 
 
 Piano and Organ Workers 
 
 Plate Printers 
 
 Powder Workers 
 
 Printing Pressmen 
 
 Print Cutters 
 
 Sawsmiths 
 
 Shingle Weavers 
 
 Slate Workers 
 
 Stove Mounters 
 
 Tailors 
 
 Textile Workers 
 
 Tip Printers 
 
 Tobacco Workers 
 
 Travelers' Goods and Leather 
 
 Novelty Workers 
 Typographical Union 
 Upholsterers 
 Wire Weavers 
 Wood Carvers 
 
 The officers and the Executive Council conduct all 
 busmess between the sessions of the annual conven- 
 tions which does not belong to any one affiliated or- 
 ganization, and execute the instructions of the conven- 
 tions. 
 
 They have given an increasing amount of time and 
 attention to federal legislation, and, since 1906, to 
 national politics. The character of this legislation 
 indicates the position taken by the Federation on 
 questions relating to labor as well as on questions of 
 general interest. (See Chapter on Legislation.) 
 
 The routine work of the Council covers a multitude 
 of matters of importance to the organization; the 
 granting of charters to new unions, the settlement of 
 innumerable jurisdictional disputes, general organiza- 
 tion work in unorganized districts and trades, and sup- 
 port of special union interests through the levying of 
 assessments. It also makes connections with groups 
 of people other than unionists who are interested in 
 problems of interest to the Federation, and publishes 
 a monthly magazine. The American Federationist and 
 a weekly " News Letter." 
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR 25 
 
 Every local union affiliated directly or indirectly 
 with an international union is expected and entitled 
 to affiliate with the Central Labor Union, chartered by 
 the American Federation, in the city in which it is 
 located. These city organizations exist to look after 
 matters of local concern to all the local unions af- 
 filiated with them. 
 
 The city organization is not supposed to interfere 
 in a trade situation where local trade organization ex- 
 ists, except at the invitation of the local union of the 
 trade, and it is not expected to organize in a trade 
 locally unorganized, except under the direction or in 
 cooperation with the national union which holds juris- 
 dictional rights over the trade. A city central may 
 not cooperate with a local union if the national union 
 offers objections. If it does so, it may suffer the 
 penalty of losing its own A. F. of L. charter. As 
 was noted above, certain city central unions have de- 
 fied the international unions in backing up a rebellious 
 local without losing their connection with the Fed- 
 eration, but such defiance is based on exceptional 
 strength and unusual local vitality. 
 
 Many city central unions have taken part in local 
 politics, usually unofficially, and have given important 
 support to a political measure or political candidate 
 for office. They undertake to secure the employment 
 of union labor in city contracts and the passage of 
 city ordinances of interest to organized labor. 
 
 The thirty-two State Branches are chartered by 
 
26 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 "it 
 
 the Federation, primarily to secure the enactment of 
 laws for the protection and advancement of labor in 
 the state through the state legislatures. 
 
 These branches are made up from the local unions 
 and the city central organizations within the state 
 chartered by the Federation. The branches usually 
 hold annual or biennial conventions, when legislative 
 programs are drawn up, and a campaign is organized 
 for the coming session of the state legislature. The 
 bulk of the laws for the protection of labor have 
 been secured through these agencies. (See Chapter on 
 Legislation.) 
 
 There is no means of measuring the value or the 
 extent of the educational work of the American Fed- 
 eration. For thirty-three years it has been teaching 
 the lessons of collective action and organization to 
 labor m every state in the country. The 2,000,000 
 men and women who are members are only a small 
 fraction of the workers who have learned through the 
 Federation the futility of competing against others 
 for a wage. The membership represents workers 
 who have gained a sufficient foothold in a trade or 
 industry to make it possible for them to declare their 
 allegiance to their union without paying the penalty 
 of losing their jobs. 
 
 Through association, the union men and women 
 have learned to guard jealously respect for workers as 
 a class ; they resent the position of ignominy and degra- 
 dation to which their class is assigned. 
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR 2y 
 
 It would be difficult to measure the economic gains 
 which the trade organizations have secured, or realize 
 what labor's position would be to-day without them. 
 If each union reported the wage gains directly con- 
 ceded the union, the real gain could not be determined 
 without fixing in terms equally exact the proportional 
 increase in cost of living which fell to organized 
 workers, if not to labor in general. Even were such 
 computations possible, a still more important factor 
 would need to be determined, namely, the effect on 
 the general wage rate in the whole labor market which 
 the potentiality of labor organization exerts. 
 
 The report of the Secretary of the Federation for 
 1913 showed that forty-five international unions had 
 made 3,190 settlements for improved conditions with- 
 out striking. These figures give no idea of existing 
 agreements, as unions in several cases reported that 
 " a great number " or " many " settlements were made 
 during the year, and no union reported the still greater 
 number of contracts or agreements which were opera- 
 tive either through an unexpired term, or which were 
 indeterminate, or the still greater gains which thou- 
 sands of union workers were enjoying by tacit 
 understanding without resorting to formal con- 
 tract. 
 
 The same report shows that 974 strikes in 67 inter- 
 national unions occurred during the year. This re- 
 port, together with the foregoing, gives some idea of 
 the policy of the Federation, and its determination to 
 
f 
 
 1 1 
 
 28 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 establish by methods of peace, rather than war, labor's 
 
 part m fixing conditions of work. 
 If the Federation is tenacious in relation to methods- 
 
 If It hesitates to change old forms for new, it is be- 
 cause us unions have made present and heavy sacrifices 
 
 for future gams. When revolutionary unionists de- 
 mand that trade unions withdraw all restrictions it is 
 m many cases equivalent to a demand on men who 
 own more tangible forms of private property that they 
 surrender the keys. It is important to keep clearly Z 
 mmd the purposes of conservative and revolutionary 
 unionism to realize the integrity of each. 
 
 deny the Socialist position that the A F nf i ^'"'V^^ '" 
 
 the mutual obligations and interests of L^,.hn5''i"K"''*''l*"* 
 his statement that h« a;a -J,! ". capital and labor. But 
 
 two classed" harmonious" was'ZVl" *?! '■"''"»' °f 'h' 
 cialist criticism nor aTendorstment of thl"'l"°"r°' ""• ^O" 
 that there is no basis fo?°a|reTment '('lee p "« ) ''°'"'°" 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 THE RAILROAD BROTHERHOODS 
 
 I 
 
 Conservatism — Common characteristics of the four organizations 
 — Mutual insurance associations — " Protective poKcy " — 
 Arbitration as a substitute for strikes — ^The Erdman Act — 
 Development of "protective policy "—Territorial divisions 
 and concerted movements — Standardization — Federation — 
 Repudiation of coercive methods. 
 
 There are unions of railroad workers which are a 
 part of the American Federation of Labor, such as 
 the car builders, shop and road builders and repairers, 
 telegraphers, machinists, and, in a limited district, 
 switchmen. But the most important unions of railroad 
 workers are independent of the American Federation, 
 and represent a distinct type of labor organization. 
 These unions are: The Brotherhood of Locomotive 
 Engineers, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen 
 and Enginemen, the Brotherhood of Railway Traiu- 
 men, which includes conductors, baggagemen, brake- 
 men, flagmen, switchmen in yard and train service, 
 and the Order of Railway Conductors. 
 
 These four organizations with their common char- 
 acteristics and their independence of the general union 
 movement, are often briefly characterized as conserva- 
 tive by labor union men whose own organizations are 
 
 as conservative in purpose and in administration as 
 
 29 
 
 •TIIU li 
 
30 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 If 
 
 are the brotherhoods of railroad workers. But con- 
 servative unions of the American Federation recog- 
 nize a common labor movement by becoming a part 
 of it and this the brotherhoods have refused to do. 
 While many of the unions of the American Federation 
 give only a nominal or official recognition to the idea 
 of labor unity, the position taken by the brotherhoods 
 frankly and squarely places the emphasis on unity of 
 interests between limited groups of workers and their 
 employers. Although some of the unions of the Fed- 
 eration are intent on the limited unity, they have 
 not sufficient confidence in their own strength to take 
 a position of independence. 
 
 The brotherhoods have depended on their conserva- 
 tism for their growth. Their tenets as well as their 
 history are testimonials to their faith in established 
 institutions. They lay stress on the personal conduct 
 of their members, and make no complaints against 
 the exploitation of a class. The cardinal principles 
 of the Brotherhood of iLocomotive Engineers are 
 " sobriety, truth, justice, and morality." A brother 
 may be expelled from membership for intoxication, 
 the keeping of a saloon or attending a bar, for habitual 
 gambling or for making money through a gambling 
 house. The preamble includes a statement recognizing 
 the need for coordination of capital and labor, and the 
 cultivation of amicable relations with employers. The 
 motto of the Firemen is " protection, charity, sobriety, 
 and industry." They also declare their belief in the 
 
 THE RAILROAD BROTHERHOODS 31 
 
 identity of interests between worker and employer, 
 the necessity of cooperation and the cultivation of 
 harmony. The Brotherhood of Trainmen affirms its 
 intention of establishing mutual confidence and bar*- 
 monious relations; and its rules of conduct, as well 
 as the rules of the Conductors' Order, are emphatic 
 and strenuous mandates which members disobey at 
 risk of membership. 
 The editor of the Railroad Trainman writes : 
 
 The Brotherhood has tried to be fair to the public, 
 the employer, and itself. It has accepted its responsibili- 
 ties and consistently stood by what it has agreed to do, 
 although there have been times when taking that posi- 
 tion brought upon it the most bitter censure from those 
 who have as yet to learn that a labor organization, to be 
 successful, must be a business organization that holds its 
 word as sacred as its bond. . . . Our educational work 
 has been of a practical nature calculated to have the men 
 understand their side of every question and at the same 
 time realize that the industrial question is not one-sided 
 by any means, but that the rights and privileges of the 
 employer are as equally entitled to consideration as are 
 the rights and privileges of themselves. In a word, 
 the Brotherhood has attempted to bring about a fair 
 understanding as to the rights between the employer 
 and the employee. ^ 
 
 The editor is fully justified in saying that the ef- 
 forts of the Trainmen (and he might have added that 
 the efforts of the other brotherhpods) to become a 
 business organization have brought upon it bitter 
 criticism. Some radical labor unions object strenu- 
 
32 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ously to business organizations and their methods; 
 they consider that the first lesson in labor organization 
 is class opposition to the whole business institution. 
 But the brotherhoods have no intention of changing 
 the industrial system. They have no desire to disturb 
 the relation of master and servant. They are conscien- 
 tious upholders of the existing social order. It is 
 their concern to maintain a standing in the community 
 which will conform to what is expected of skilled 
 workingmen. In their advancement and in their 
 growth in membership they have given signal evi- 
 dence of their loyalty to the laws and the customs of 
 the country. It is, indeed, due to the efforts of the 
 brotherhoods, and not to the railroad managements, 
 that peace and continuous service on the roads are 
 preserved. 
 
 The history of railroad systems in America is re- 
 plete with tales of recklessness in the management 
 of finances. But as conservers of social institutions 
 the sins of financial manipulation are trifling in com- 
 parison with the failures of directors to deal gener- 
 ously with the brotherhoods. In one case they specu- 
 lated with the savings of stockholders and the sur- 
 vival of their own particular administration. In the 
 other case they speculated with the contentment and 
 the faith of the workers in the established social order. 
 They do, it is true, treat with the brotherhoods, and 
 on some systems they are to-day meeting them half- 
 way; but the brotherhoods have worked unceasingly 
 
 *- ■« W " «t". %-'n;r'» J<j. ' ; ' "r ^ w ii,^ ■ t !W it> - 
 
 ^■^-i*^.*aa*Bfflia«i 
 
 THE RAILROAD BROTHERHOODS 33 
 
 for " fair conditions " and have sacrificed the hopes 
 of thousands of men in their efforts to gain them. 
 
 The brotherhoods were organized originally, not as 
 labor unions, but as mutual insurance societies. Rail- 
 road employment is listed as extra hazardous by some 
 of the insurance companies. None of the companies 
 issue policies which meet the needs of the men in the 
 service. It does not pay to meet the needs of men, 
 who, as a class, are killed at the rate of nine a day, or 
 three thousand a year. No profit-making business in- 
 volving life and death chances can afford to hold out 
 inducements to men who in seventeen years will all 
 be dead or totally disabled. It has been estimated 
 that the cost of insurance of railroad workers charged 
 by the ordinary insurance companies is more than 
 thirty per cent, above that charged by the brother- 
 hoods. This estimate would be much higher than it is 
 had the difference between the rates which the regular 
 insurance companies would charge for insurance 
 against disability been taken into consideration. Dis- 
 ability even more than death brings disaster to the 
 homes of men in railroad service. 
 
 Railroad workers are probably endowed with the 
 usual amount of fatalism that goes with meeting con- 
 stant danger. However that may be, it was with the 
 inertia of fatalists that they set to work to patch up 
 their tragedies instead of preventing the wholesale 
 slaughter which has characterized their employment 
 The brotherhoods have managed their insurance busi- 
 
34 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 \ 
 
 ness with great skill. Many millions of dollars have 
 been paid out from their insurance funds, and life in 
 times of greatest stress has been made more endurable 
 for thousands of men and their families. 
 
 The large membership of the brotherhoods is un- 
 questionably due to the insurance features of the or- 
 ganization, rather than to the collective bargaining, 
 or the " protective features," as they call their trade 
 agreements, which were introduced in the early years 
 of organization. The membership statistics are re- 
 markable. Seventy-two thousand locomotive engi- 
 neers, or ninety per cent, of the locomotive engineers 
 of the country, are members of the Brotherhood of 
 Locomotive Engineers. The Order of Railway Con- 
 ductors, covering also ninety per cent, of the conduc- 
 tors, has a membership of 49,000. The membership 
 of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and En- 
 ginemen, including both firemen and engineers, is 
 90,000. And the Brotherhood of Railway Trainmen, 
 including conductors, baggagemen, brakemen, flagmen, 
 and switchmen in yard and train service, has a mem- 
 bership of 135,000. 
 
 Their first efforts to change their wage conditions 
 through their organizations were met with bitter and 
 unrelenting opposition by the management of the 
 roads. The Firemen, for example, adopted the " pro- 
 tective policy " in 1879, two years after the organiza- 
 tion of their insurance business. They were forced 
 to abandon it after a brief experience on account of the 
 
 THE RAILROAD BROTHERHOODS 35 
 
 opposition of the railroad management. In 1885 they 
 reintroduced the policy of collective bargaining, and 
 have continued ever since to develop it. 
 
 While the insurance features of the brotherhoods 
 have protected members, they are also responsible for 
 the unfailing conservatism of the organizations. A 
 member who has invested in a policy and has carried 
 that policy for several years and is counting on its 
 protection is wary of strikes or other experiments 
 involving risk. It is well recognized that trade union 
 officials who are the trustees of large benefit funds or 
 insurance features of unions are more sensitive to a 
 disturbance of the treasury than to the economic posi- 
 tion of their members or their relation to their em- 
 ployers. 
 
 The insurance features are used as disciplinary 
 weapons by the organization. Men who strike without 
 the sanction of the organization in which they are 
 insured and hold membership are expelled from the 
 Brotherhoods of Trainmen and Firemen. On the 
 other hand, in no one of the organizations can a man 
 retain membership who has scabbed in an authorized 
 strike. 
 I The avoidance of strikes is a business principle of 
 I the brotherhoods. It has also become a virtue and a 
 social responsibility assumed by the officers. The tak- 
 ing of a strike vote is a part of the required prepara- 
 tion for arbitration proceedings, as explained else- 
 wherdL 
 
36 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 
 <• • 
 
 During arbitration proceedings it is usual for the 
 managers of the companies to point to the extension 
 of organization among the railroad workers and the 
 movements for concerted action over extended terri- 
 tories and between the brotherhoods, and to interpret 
 the extension as a preparation for a general strike. 
 Mr. Morrissy, representing the engineers on the arbi- 
 tration board of 1912, in signing the minority report 
 of the board, expressed the attitude of the brother- 
 hoods on the question of the general strike. He 
 did not consider that the majority report had reason 
 for referring to the railroad strike in France in 
 191 o in comparing the situation in the United 
 States. 
 
 The comparison fails to note the difference between 
 the general strike of engineers and that of all the rail- 
 •way employees, which was the case or at least attempted 
 in France. Another phase with which there can be no 
 comparison of an assumed situation in this country is 
 that the French strike was a part of a program of 
 European syndicalism. The general strike is no part of 
 the American railway employees' program. In brief, 
 the analogy which the majority report attempts to make, 
 would require all the men in all the railways to quit 
 work at the same time, a condition so improbable as to 
 question the propriety of any recommendation based 
 upon it.* 
 
 In place of strikes the brotherhoods have given 
 their full indorsement to arbitration of disputes. The 
 managers and the unions in the latter years have made, 
 
 THE RAILROAD BROTHERHOODS 
 
 37 
 
 II 
 
 J 
 
 as well, numerous wage agreements without resort to 
 the court of arbitration or to strikes. 
 
 The Erdman Act, the federal statute which provided 
 for voluntary arbitration or mediation in disputes be- 
 tween railroad managers and their employees until 
 1913, was enacted in 1898. During the eight years 
 that followed, the law was invoked in one dispute only. 
 From 1908 until 19 12 it was appealed to sixty times. 
 Within a period of five years application was made ac- 
 cording to the provisions of the law under federal 
 arbitration or mediation, by the railroads nineteen 
 times, by the unions thirteen times, and sixteen times 
 joint application was made by managers and union 
 officers. 
 
 In 191 2 it was officially reported: 
 
 During the period covered by the practical operation 
 of this law there have been hundreds of cases in which 
 either new agreements have been negotiated or existing 
 agreements reopened and wage scales and working con- 
 ditions readjusted through conferences between the par- 
 ticular road involved and one or another of the classes 
 of employees covered by the provisions of the Erdman 
 Act. On the average it is probable that hardly a week 
 goes by in which some one of these classes of employees 
 is not engaged in negotiations with some railroad in 
 some part of the United States concerning changes in 
 their existing agreements. A large number of these are 
 settled directly without the intervention of any of the 
 national officials of the organization concerned. . . .' 
 
 The Erdman Act provided that its machinery should 
 not be set in motion until a strike had occurred, or 
 
li 
 
 38 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 the stoppage of work was seriously threatened. It 
 was for the purpose of proving that the stoppage of 
 work was seriously threatened, or, rather, to start up 
 arbitration proceedings, that the strike vote was taken. 
 The fact that the men voted to strike placed the officers 
 in a better position during arbitration proceedings. 
 There was throughout the proceedings the possibility 
 of a strike in case of failure to agree. On the other 
 hand, the well-known conservatism of the organiza- 
 tions, and the well-known objection of the officers to 
 calling the men out on strike, together with the prece- 
 dent against striking which has been established, gave 
 the managers of the roads a sense of security when 
 withholding the concessions demanded by the union.* 
 For many years each one of the brotherhoods made 
 wage agreements with single systems or divisions of a 
 system or even with a single superintendent. Gradu- 
 ally the brotherhoods formed local and joint protec- 
 tive boards, made up of representatives of their local 
 lodges and divisions. Later, these protective boards 
 included the lodges of a brotherhood throughout a 
 system or related systems. At last, these joint protec- 
 tive boards were federated, and jointly worked out 
 uniform wage scales and conditions for the class of 
 workers which came under their jurisdiction withm 
 their own territory. Up to this point collective bar- 
 gaining had developed from agreements with smgle 
 
 ♦ For fuller information on the Erdman Act and its amend- 
 ment in 1913. sec Chapter on Arbitration. 
 
 THE RAILROAD BROTHERHOODS 39 
 
 superintendents of road divisions for one class of 
 servants, like the engineers, to bargaining for the 
 same class within a territory which covered 
 a third of the country and the roads operating 
 within it. The three territorial divisions are the West 
 ern, the Eastern, and the Southern. The Western Ter- 
 ritory includes the Illinois Central and all lines lying 
 west of that road and of the western shore of Lake 
 Michigan. The Eastern Territory includes the roads 
 north of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway and east 
 of the Illinois Central and Lake Michigan. The South- 
 ern Territory covers the roads south of the Chesapeake 
 and Ohio and east of the Illinois Central. 
 
 The Western Territory was organized in 1901, and 
 the first concerted movement was made by the Con- 
 ductors and Trainmen jointly in 1902. Four years 
 later the second territorial movement was made by the 
 Engineers, and the following year the third movement 
 was made by the Firemen, all in the Western Terri- 
 tory. 
 
 Concerted movements were opposed in the Eastern 
 Territory long after they were accepted by the man- 
 agers of systems in the Western. It was not until 19 10 
 that the Eastern managers would consent to a joint 
 consideration of wage conditions. The Conductors, 
 again jointly with the Trainmen, made the first suc- 
 cessful attempt to secure concerted action in the East- 
 ern Territory. And, as in the Western, the Engineers 
 followed the movement two years later of the Con- 
 
40 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 I 
 
 It 
 
 ductors and Trainmen, and the Firemen, the succeeding 
 year, followed the movement of the Engineers. 
 
 These movements of the brotherhoods for concerted 
 action within a territory are still resisted by the man- 
 agers of the Eastern and Southern roads. But in the 
 Western Territory a single movement settles wage 
 conditions as they are initiated singly or jointly by 
 the brotherhoods. 
 
 The chief purpose of the territorial movement is to 
 standardize wage rates and all other wage conditions. 
 Warren S. Stone, during the session of the arbitration 
 court in the case of the Eastern firemen, in 1913, de- 
 clared that the Western managers like many associa- 
 tions of employers preferred conferring with their 
 men jointly for the fixing of uniform wage condi- 
 tions. The recommendations of the Engineers* arbi- 
 tration board the year previous, it will be remembered, 
 was an indorsement of Mr. Stone's position in its 
 recommendations for uniformity in wage rates for 
 railroad employees. But the majority report, made by 
 the representatives of the roads and the representa- 
 tives of the public, objected to the fixing of those rates 
 by collective bargaining. If wages were to be fixed 
 they proposed that they should be fixed by a Federal 
 board, as railroad rates are fixed by a Federal com- 
 mission. As this proposition excluded the voice of 
 the workers from the settlement of their terms of 
 work, the representative of the Engineers filed his 
 minority report. 
 
 THE RAILROAD BROTHERHOODS 41 
 
 The merging of railroads and railroad systems has 
 made uniformity of wage rates inevitable over large 
 systems. It was impossible for the brotherhoods to 
 standardize wages over a territory or territories and 
 to increase rates without concerted action within 
 their organizations. There is a change in public 
 opinion, moreover, in regard to unrestricted competi- 
 tion in railroad aflfairs. The Engineers' arbitration 
 court of 19 1 2 gave as its opinion that in fixing wage 
 rates the wages paid by meanly-managed roads should 
 not be considered, but the prevailing wage rate of a 
 locality or of the most successfully managed roads 
 should determine decisions. The same court discov- 
 ered that in the Eastern Territory six systems owned 
 or controlled seventy-nine per cent, of the fifty-two 
 systems in the territory. 
 
 How the organization of railroad management is 
 conducive to standardization of working conditions 
 has been well stated by John R. Commons. He says 
 that the railroad brotherhoods 
 
 deal with corporations conducted like governments. 
 Their scale of wages is like a legislative enactment fixing 
 a uniform rate of pay for government employees over a 
 vast area. The scale is issued as a general order from 
 the highest authority to all subordinates who hire and 
 discharge these classes of employees. The positions 
 themselves are well defined, there is but one man, and 
 no chance to divide up his work among a set of helpers. 
 The superintendent is not expected to pay less or to pay 
 more, nor to change his force in order to get cheaper 
 
 I 
 
A^ 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 help. Years of experience have shown the railway 
 brotherhoods that they can rely upon a promise so far 
 removed as this one is from the ordinary treatment of 
 labor as a commodity fluctuating upon demand and 
 supply. * 
 
 While the concerted action of local lodges of each 
 of the brotherhoods was developing the standardiza- 
 tion of wage conditions, another movement of greater 
 significance from the point of view of labor organiza- 
 tion was being advanced. This was the federation 
 of the brotherhoods for purposes of further developing 
 collective bargaining. 
 
 With scrupulous care the brotherhoods had made 
 it clear, so far as action was concerned, that they 
 were not in sympathy with the labor movement as 
 such, and that class action was not a part of their 
 program. They not only refrained from alliances 
 with the unions of the American Federation, but they 
 carried on their bargaining with their superior officers 
 independently of each other. They forbade their 
 members to strike in sympathy with the members of 
 the other brotherhoods. 
 
 In 1903 a " Plan of System Federation " was 
 adopted and the position of complete craft independ- 
 ence was officially compromised by the brotherhoods 
 of railroad workers. In spite of the well-defined 
 policy of the organizations, sympathetic or joint 
 strikes of the members of the different railroad crafts 
 had occurred, but with the growth and discipline of 
 
 THE RAILROAD BROTHERHOODS 
 
 43 
 
 ■ 
 
 the organizations they had become less and less fre- 
 quent. 
 
 The Brotherhoods of Trainmen and Conductors 
 were the first to break away from the position of com- 
 plete independence and work together in the making 
 and adjusting of contracts. But the Engineers and 
 Firemen continued the original policy of independ- 
 ence until 19 1 3, or ten years after the plan of fed- 
 eration had been formulated. There has been in- 
 evitable friction between two organizations represent- 
 ing men so closely related as the firemen and the engi- 
 neers, between the man who runs the engine and the 
 one who fires it. A fireman from the day he starts 
 firing is in the process of becoming an engineer, for 
 without his experience of firing he may not qualify 
 for engineering. When he does qualify he may 
 have to continue as fireman until a position of engi- 
 neer is opened to him. In consequence, many en- 
 gineers are members of the Brotherhoods of Firemen. 
 Before the federation agreement between the Firemen 
 and Engineers was adopted the Brotherhood of Engi- 
 neers negotiated new wage conditions for all 
 engineers irrespective of their union affiliation. Each 
 of the organizations enforced the terms of the wage 
 contracts for their own members. Under the new 
 arrangement either organization may negotiate new 
 schedules or they may be negotiated jointly. The 
 new agreement recommends the making of joint 
 schedules and joint negotiation whenever possible. 
 
44 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 The " Plan of System Federation," as amended in 
 1910, provides that any of the four brotherhoods 
 " may federate for the purpose of adjusting any 
 complaint which may be presented in accordance with 
 the laws of the organization aggrieved." It permits 
 the federated organizations to cooperate but not 
 federate with any other organization of railway em- 
 ployees. Under safeguards a vote of the federated 
 organization to support a grievance of one of the 
 organizations may be taken and a strike inaugurated. 
 If any one of the federated organizations votes not to 
 strike the other organizations may proceed without it. 
 
 The more recent agreement between the Engineers 
 and Firemen specifies: 
 
 In case either organization shall make an issue and 
 declare a strike independent of the other organization, 
 whether there is a joint working agreement or not be- 
 tween the committees, the organization making the issue 
 will not order a strike of its members who are working 
 under an agreement made by the other organization, and 
 it shall be understood that should the Brotherhood of 
 Locomotive Engineers order a strike, it will not require 
 its members who are firing to quit their positions as fire- 
 men, and if the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen 
 and Enginemen shall order a strike it will not require 
 its members who are running engines to quit their posi- 
 tions as engineers.** 
 
 It further provides on the question of strikes that : 
 
 When a strike is called by one organization the 
 members of the other organization shall not perform any 
 
 THE RAILROAD BROTHERHOODS 
 
 45 
 
 service that was being performed before the strike was 
 called by the members of the organization who are on 
 strike.* 
 
 In other words, this agreement makes it clear that 
 while no member of one organization may take the 
 place of a member of another which is on strike, a 
 fireman shall fire an engine if the Firemen are not 
 striking on their own account even if the Engineers 
 are on strike and the engine is being run by a non- 
 union and strike-breaking engineer. In the same way 
 an engineer shall not regard the fact that a strike- 
 breaking fireman is firing his engine. 
 
 The contract between the Engineers and the Fire- 
 men, the plan for the federation of the four crafts, 
 and the concerted action within the three territories 
 are all for the single purpose of perfecting con- 
 tractual relations between the management of the 
 roads and the men. They do not indicate a develop- 
 ment of class-conscious action as understood by the 
 radical labor unions. But they are a recognition, 
 born of experience, of the interdependence of related 
 crafts. The brotherhoods have not adopted any of 
 the usual labor union methods which are particularly 
 condemned by the employing class. They have not 
 stood for the union shop, or the boycott, of the 
 American Federation. The value of the insurance 
 features of the brotherhoods to all railroad men, 
 and the fact that the methods of road manage- 
 
Ml" 
 
 "1! 
 
 H 
 
 46 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ments secure for all the employees universal condi- 
 tions, make the union shop regulation unneces- 
 sary. 
 
 On the question of picketing, the president of the 
 Brotherhood of Trainmen instructed the members of 
 the union that the order to strike according to the 
 rules of the Order, means that members "will be 
 expected to cease work at a given time and to 
 peacefully and quietly depart from the company's 
 property, and remain away from such property until 
 the strike is settled or until you receive instructions 
 from your general committee to return to service 
 . . . if the railroad companies are able to secure 
 the service of a sufficient number of men to operate 
 their property we must concede they have a right to 
 do so." • 
 
 With the features which are particularly irritating 
 to employers removed, with the concerted movement 
 well developed in three territories covering the rail- 
 road systems of the country, with arbitration well 
 established, the brotherhoods are fully prepared on 
 their part to test out collective bargaining on a peace 
 basis. The fact that railroad management is highly 
 centralized is an important element in the scheme of 
 the brotherhoods for the peaceful settlements of 
 wage conditions through trade agreements made and 
 administered on terms of business consolidation. 
 There are no present indications that the brotherhoods' 
 
 THE RAILROAD BROTHERHOODS 
 
 47 
 
 have other intentions or are to be counted on for 
 sympathetic action in the general labor movement.* 
 
 ♦ Since the above was written officers of the brotherhoods 
 sustained members in their refusal to transport the militia into 
 the strike zone of the coal miners of Colorado. 
 
(!' 
 
 li* 
 
 M 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD 
 
 Its inception—Preamble— Relation to Socialism, to Syndicalism- 
 Criticism of trade unions— No contract with capital— Direct 
 action vs. political— War on the trade unions— Organiza- 
 tion features realized and planned for— Centralization of 
 power— Membership— Its present position. 
 
 Interest in a well-established organization centers 
 around what it is doing and what it has accomplished. 
 Interest in a new organization centers chiefly around 
 what it is doing, in the light of what it proposes to 
 do; and how it differs from other organizations in 
 the same field, and its relation to them. 
 
 The Industrial Workers of the World proclaimed 
 that its coming was due to the failure of existing 
 labor unions— the failure in the methods adopted, as 
 well as failure in conception of the ultimate purpose 
 of the labor movement. 
 
 The new organization was called into existence by 
 a manifesto issued in January, 1905, which con- 
 cluded its survey of an outworn industrial system 
 with a statement of the failure of trade unionism, 
 and the task which a new organization must ac- 
 complish : 
 
 48 
 
 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD 49 
 
 The employers' line of battle and methods of war- 
 fare correspond to the solidarity of the mechanical and 
 industrial concentration, while laborers still form their 
 fighting organizations on lines of long-gone trade divi- 
 sions. The battles of the past emphasize this lesson. 
 The textile workers of Lowell, Philadelphia and Fall 
 River; the butchers of Chicago, weakened by the dis- 
 integrating effects of trade divisions ; the machinists on 
 the Santa Fe, unsupported by their fellow workers sub- 
 ject to the same masters; the long-struggling miners of 
 Colorado hampered by lack of unity and solidarity upon 
 the industrial battlefield, all bear witness to the helpless- 
 ness and impotency of labor as at present organized. 
 This worn-out and corrupt system offers no promise 
 of improvement and adaptation. There is no silver lin- 
 ing to the clouds of darkness and despair settling down 
 upon the world of labor. This system offers only a per- 
 petual struggle for slight relief from wage slavery. It 
 is blind to the possibility of establishing an industrial 
 democracy, wherein there shall be no wage slavery, but 
 where the workers will own the tools which they operate 
 and the product of which they alone should enjoy. ^ 
 
 The last sentence marks off the ultimate purpose 
 of the Industrial Workers of the World from the 
 American Federation of Labor and the Railway 
 Brotherhoods, which are not concerned with the dis- 
 possessing of capital, but with maintaining contracts 
 advantageous to labor. 
 
 The preamble to the constitution further elucidates 
 the revolutionary purposes which characterize and 
 distinguish the Industrial Workers of the World 
 among the labor organizations of America: 
 
i' 
 
 
 50 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 The working class and the employing class have 
 nothing in common. There can be no peace so long as 
 hunger and want are found among millions of the work- 
 ing people, and the few, who make up the employmg 
 class, have all the good things of life. Between these 
 two classes a struggle must go on until the workers 
 of the world organize as a class, take possession of the 
 earth and the machinery of production, and abolish the 
 wage system. We find that the centering of the manage- 
 ment of industries into fewer and fewer hands makes 
 the trade unions unable to cope with the ever-growing 
 power of the employing class. The trade unions foster 
 a state of affairs which allows one set of workers to be 
 pitted against another set of workers in the same indus- 
 try, thereby helping to defeat one another in wage 
 wars. Moreover, the trade unions aid the employing 
 class to mislead the workers into the belief that the 
 working class have interests in common with their em- 
 ployers. , , . t 
 These conditions can be changed and the interest of 
 the working class upheld only by an organization formed 
 in such a way that all its members in any one industry, 
 or in all industries if necessary, cease work whenever a 
 strike or lockout is on in any department thereof, thus 
 making an injury to one an injury to all. 
 
 Instead of the conservative motto, " a fair day's wage 
 for a fair day's work," we must inscribe on our banner 
 the revolutionary watchword, "abolition of the wage 
 
 system." , . , ^ . 
 
 It is the historic mission of the working class to do 
 away with capitalism. The army of production must be 
 organized, not only for the every-day struggle with 
 capitalists, but also to carry on production when capital- 
 ism shall have been overthrown. By organizing indus- 
 trially we are forming the structure of the new society 
 within the shell of the old. * 
 
 I 
 
 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD 51 
 
 There is nothing in the preamble or manifesto 
 which does not conform to Socialist doctrines, or to 
 which the International Socialist movement might 
 not subscribe. It is the interpretation of the preamble 
 by individual members of the organization which 
 has attached the Industrial Workers of the World 
 to the Syndicalist rather than to the Socialist move- 
 ment. 
 
 The declaration in the manifesto that the workers 
 should own and operate their own tools, and that 
 they alone should enjoy the fruits of their labor, 
 would mean, according to American Socialists, that 
 all workers, through a political state, or regulated 
 by it, would operate, own, and enjoy collectively all 
 tools and the product of industry. 
 
 Moreover, Socialists who are not bureaucrats see 
 in the labor unions the future administrative units of 
 industrial democracy. With this point of view, they 
 can subscribe to the section of the preamble which 
 reads, "by organizing industrially we are forming 
 the structure of the new society within the shell of 
 the old." But this sentence, interpreted by the lead- 
 ers of the Industrial Workers, is directly opposed to 
 the political Socialism of America. It is the declara- 
 tion of the Syndicalists that the new social order will 
 not be dependent on political action or a political 
 state, but it will be an industrial commonwealth in 
 which all governmental functions as we know them 
 to-day will have ceased to exist, and in which each 
 
52 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 industry will be controlled by the workers in it with- 
 out external interference. 
 
 But whether the workers are Syndicalists or Social- 
 ists is less important to the Industrial Workers of 
 the World than is usually supposed. What the work- 
 ers actually believe in regard to the future, the In- 
 dustrial Workers of the World considers of less 
 importance than what they accept as true or reject 
 as false in their own present relations to their work 
 and fellow workers. The Syndicalist theory that 
 each group of workers shall control the industry in 
 which they work, is simpler in form and easier to 
 grasp than the idea of social ownership of all pro- 
 duction politically managed. The point the Indus- 
 trial Workers is keen about making is that wealth 
 belongs to labor. 
 
 To organized labor it is also unimportant whether 
 the Industrial Workers* philosophy is Syndicalist or 
 Socialist, or even whether it is sound or unsound in 
 its details of a future state. It is unimportant except 
 as it serves agitation purposes. Whatever weakness 
 or strength is inherent in the philosophy is for the 
 time being of interest to theorists rather than to labor 
 organizations in active operation from day to day. 
 
 The use of the Syndicalist theory is part of the 
 avowed purpose of the Industrial Workers to force 
 the labor movement to accept the doctrine of the class 
 struggle — to acknowledge the irreconcilable conflict 
 between capital and labor. The organization pro- 
 
 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD 53 
 
 poses to carry these doctrines through an aggressive 
 and militant campaign into the ranks of the workers 
 without property and without skill. Of the forms 
 of organization chosen by the Industrial Workers for 
 accomplishing its purpose and waging its warfare, 
 the first in importance is the substitution of indus- 
 trial for craft unionism. An official statement from 
 the secretary of the organization says: 
 
 The craft plan of organization is a relic of an obso- 
 lete stage in the evolution of capitalist production. At 
 the time of its inception it corresponded to the develop- 
 ment of the period; the productive worker in a given 
 industry took the new raw material, and with the tools 
 of the trade or craft, completed the product of that in- 
 dustry, performing every necessary operation himself. 
 As a result the workers combined in organizations the 
 lines of which were governed by the tools that they 
 used. At that period this was organization. To-day, in 
 view of the specialization of the processes of production, 
 the invention of machinery, and the concentration of 
 ownership, it is no longer organization but division. 
 And division on the economic field for the worker spells 
 defeat and degradation. ^ 
 
 The Industrial Workers set itself the task of gath- 
 ering together the workers of the separate trades of 
 an industry, the workers of the branches of an in- 
 dustry, and at last all the workers of all branches 
 of all the industries into what it calls " One Big 
 Union." 
 
 For the purpose of sympathetic action, the Indus- 
 trial Workers proposes to abolish all forms of labor 
 
 % 
 
54 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 union contract with capital, to introduce low dues 
 and low initiation fees in place of the high dues and 
 initiation fees of certain trade unions; the short 
 strike followed by the use of sabotage on the return 
 to work after a lost strike, and the education of the 
 workers to reliance on direct action rather than po- 
 litical or delegated action. 
 
 The opposition of the Industrial Workers to the 
 contract between labor unions and capital follows the 
 dogma of the irreconcilable interests of the contract- 
 ing parties. But contracts are opposed on practical 
 grounds as well. The Industrial Workers points out 
 that it is a cut-throat policy, disastrous to labor as a 
 whole, to permit one group of workers to tie them- 
 selves to capital in a determinate or indeterminate 
 contract, and because of the contract to remain at 
 work if another group in a related trade strikes and 
 needs the help of the tied-up group to win its fight. 
 The Industrial Workers states that there is only one 
 contract that workers in all honesty can make, — ^the 
 contract to stand by a fellow worker. 
 
 The Industrial Workers opposes the limitation to 
 union membership which is created by the trade 
 unions through their practice of imposing high dues 
 and initiation fees. It opposes it on the ground that 
 it creates an aristocracy of labor and is in its es- 
 sence the denial of fraternity; that the gains of the 
 few are bought at the sacrifice of the many; that it 
 destroys the spirit of unification of all labor and 
 
 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD 55 
 
 defeats the ultimate purpose of the revolutionary 
 labor movement. The low dues offer no opportunity 
 for the development of a war treasury and the In- 
 dustrial Workers has no substitute plan for financing 
 strikes. The supposition is that strikes will be short 
 and the revolutionary spirit of the workers will carry 
 them through the privations of strike periods. As 
 a matter of fact, up to date, the revolutionary spirit 
 of the strikers has called forth large financial con- 
 tributions from Socialists, labor unions, and other 
 sympathizers. But these sources of help are uncer- 
 tain and cannot be depended on for long or frequent 
 periods. 
 
 While the Industrial Workers in theory stands for 
 the short strike, the leaders have not found them- 
 selves able to accomplish it. They have found, what 
 all labor leaders know, that when workers strike, it 
 is not for revolutionary reasons, but against some 
 definite imposition, or for some gain, some specific 
 gain, intensely desired. Strikers are out to win their 
 particular point. The men or women who are ready 
 for a quick termination of the strike, are the most 
 conservative, those who most fear the power of 
 capital, those with the least rebellion in their hearts. 
 The braver spirits on whom the leaders count to sup- 
 port their revolutionary program, are those who will 
 not surrender, even for the sake of the future, their 
 particular fight with their particular boss. The work- 
 ers have not adopted the short strike program of the 
 
 
 % 
 
56 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 Industrial Workers or the suggestion that they carry 
 their fight back into the shop by the use of sabotage 
 methods. The leaders look forward to a gradual 
 realization among the workers of the advantage of 
 the short strike and its adoption as its value is under- 
 stood. 
 
 The Industrial Workers, concerned primarily with 
 the organization of the unskilled worker, claims that 
 direct action, that is, labor union action, is superior 
 to political action, in the war against capital. Its 
 reasons are that many thousands of workers are 
 foreign born ; that many more are in migratory occu- 
 pations, and cannot use the ballot; that the political 
 state is owned by capital and the strongest position 
 for labor is to attack, not the owned or controlled 
 state, but the *' ascendent ** state, which is industry. 
 Direct action, or labor union action, gives the in- 
 dividual worker greater opportunities for initiative, 
 for it is more possible for the individual worker to 
 follow and to understand, and therefore control, the 
 action of the officers of a union than of a state. The 
 members of the Industrial Workers differ in their 
 attitude toward political action. Some reject it en- 
 tirely, and some give it second place to labor union 
 action. At a meeting in New York City of a branch 
 of the Socialist Party, held in October, 1913, William 
 D. Haywood said, " I advocate the industrial ballot 
 alone when I address the workers in the textile in- 
 dustries of the East where a great majority are 
 
 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD 57 
 
 foreigners without political representation. But 
 when I speak to American workingmen in the West 
 I advocate both the industrial and the political 
 ballot." 
 
 It is only necessary to read the official literature 
 of the Industrial Workers to realize that its advent^ 
 was as much a declaration of war on the existing 
 labor unions as a signal to capital. The avowed pur- 
 pose was to supersede all other labor unions with 
 their "out-of-date methods." Much of the early 
 work was carried on in trades and territories where 
 organization existed to some extent and was under 
 the control of the American Federation of Labor. 
 In declaring war on the trade unions, it created for 
 itself a position in the labor movement which the 
 Syndicalists of England and France had avoided. The 
 Industrial Workers defends its position of attack on 
 the ground that the American Federation has com- 
 mitted its organizations " to safeguarding the em- 
 ployers' interests as well as the interests of their 
 membership, a program of harmonizing that which 
 cannot be harmonized. . . . Such a program betrays 
 them into the hands of their opponents, for it sets the 
 seal of their own organization's approval upon their 
 condition of servitude." * 
 
 The Industrial Workers considers that the efforts 
 of labor union officials to deal with capital are in- 
 evitably stultifying; that the spirit of compromise, 
 an intrinsic part of bargaining, gradually modifies 
 
58 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 their point of view; that as they surrender their un- 
 compromising labor position, they become blocks in 
 the way of advance. 
 
 There are probably many thousands of members of 
 the American Federation who indorse the tenets of 
 the Industrial Workers, but believe that the American 
 Federation can be made to change its program, and 
 that the workers who wish to make war on capital 
 cannot afford to waste their strength in forming an 
 opposition organization. They believe the same re- 
 sults can be accomplished by " permeating " existing 
 organizations with the revolutionary spirit. There 
 are also active American Federation men who think 
 the Industrial Workers as a separate organization will 
 be of value in the class struggle if it confines itself to 
 fields in which the Federation has failed or has not 
 attempted organization. The very existence of the 
 Industrial Workers makes it less difficult for conserva- 
 tive unions to contract with employers, who fear the 
 possibility of falling into the hands of an unmerciful 
 organization. 
 
 In working out the plans for a new organization, 
 the Industrial Workers was partially guided by a 
 desire to avoid what it considered the weaknesses in 
 structure of the American Federation. It was par- 
 ticularly bent on avoiding the autonomy of a division. 
 The local industrial union corresponds to the local 
 trade union but has more freedom. The local in- 
 
 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD 59 
 
 dustrial union includes in its membership all the 
 workers in an industry in one locality. 
 
 The Industrial Workers in circumscribing the 
 power of the national union pointed out the restric- 
 tions and evils which result from the autonomous 
 rule of the international trade unions; the suppres- 
 sion of membership interest and control. The na- 
 tional industrial unions are given control over the 
 local unions in matters of common interest to the 
 workers in the industries they represent. In matters 
 of general interest and welfare to workers of all 
 industries the General Executive Board of the In- 
 dustrial Workers directs the membership. It also 
 provides that the executive board shall have the power 
 to call strikes in any division of the organization if 
 in the opinion of the board any subordinate union on 
 strike needs the help of any other. This centraliza- 
 tion of power is the organization's effort to bring 
 about solidarity in the whole labor group. 
 
 The national industrial unions are organized when 
 there exists in an industry the required number of 
 local industrial unions, with the required minimum 
 of membership. In 1913 the existing national unions 
 with their locals were reported as follows: The na- 
 tional Industrial Union of Textile Workers, with 37 
 local unions; the Forest and Lumber Workers, with 
 48 local unions; the Marine and Transport Workers, 
 with 12 local unions. There were also 95 local unions 
 for which there are no corresponding national unions. 
 
6o 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 '■- '!!, 
 
 I « 
 
 The plan of the Industrial Workers includes the 
 formation of industrial departments in which shall 
 be affiliated all national industrial unions of kindred 
 industries. No departments at the present time exist. 
 This department plan provides f or : ( i ) A Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture, Land, Fishery, and Water 
 Products; (2) a Department of Mining; (3) a De- 
 partment of Transportation and Communication; (4) 
 a Department of Manufacturing and General Pro- 
 duction; (s) a Department of Construction; (6) a 
 Department of Public Service. 
 
 The Industrial District Councils, which correspond 
 to the city central unions of the American Federation, 
 are given a more important place in the scheme of 
 the organization than they are in the Federation. In 
 the latter, affiliation is optional with local unions. 
 The local industrial unions are required to join the 
 District Councils of the Industrial Workers. The 
 District Councils, moreover, are given supervision 
 over the work of organization in their district. They 
 are expected to employ organizers and push forward 
 the unionizing of workers in their district as far as it 
 is possible to do. 
 
 The division of power between the General Execu- 
 tive Board, the National Industrial Unions, and the 
 District Councils is regarded as an important depart- 
 ure from the American Federation scheme, which 
 places absolute power in the hands of the interna- 
 tional unions. 
 
 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD 61 
 
 The question of "centralization or decentraliza- 
 tion " has been, and still is, a burning issue among the 
 leaders of the Industrial Workers. A delegate to 
 the second convention of the Industrial Workers, who 
 was largely responsible for the policy of limiting the 
 power of the national unions, and giving the general 
 executive a controlling hand over the organization as 
 a whole, explained his position at that time. He said : 
 
 The issue is not to build up a czar, but the issue is 
 to prevent the establishment of petty independencies of 
 petty czars. The issue that presents itself before us is 
 the issue that the government of these United States 
 was confronted with in the matter of states' rights, when 
 every state presumed to go it independent of the central 
 administration. . . . 
 
 Quoting from the constituton of the Industrial 
 Workers, he said: . . . 
 
 The subdivision national and international unions 
 shall have autonomy in their respective internal affairs, 
 provided the general executive board shall have power 
 to control these industrial unions in matters concerning 
 the interest of the general welfare. ... He con- 
 tinued: You will find the repeated statement ... of 
 William D. Haywood that this is to be a government, not 
 of departments, but of the rank and file. . . . He joined 
 in the view which I have stated, that the departments, 
 so-called, must be in the nature of the states of the 
 United States, and that there should be no less and no 
 more autonomy . . . this government of the United 
 States is not a government of states, but a government 
 of the people. For the same reason, the government of 
 
 ( 
 
62 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 1^ 
 
 I! 
 IS ji 
 
 this Industrial Workers of the Worid is not a govern- 
 "^Tc?^ departments, it is a government of the rank 
 and file. Moreover, if you turn over to the manifesto, 
 along the Imes of which we hewed so close, and allowed 
 neither extremists nor reactionists to cause us to swerve, 
 that manifesto clearly speaks about the autonomy that 
 should prevail, namely, in internal matters that do not 
 concern others, and it refers to working class unity. A 
 working class unity cannot be maintained in the I. W 
 W. if the head of any department has it in his power to 
 exclude from the rank and file the actions of the Gen- 
 eral Executive Board of the whole body. If the gov- 
 ernor of a state or the legislature of a state had power to 
 keep information away from the rank and file of the 
 state as to what occurs, you can imagine what would 
 be the result. And that was just what was wanted by 
 . . . the element that wanted that no law passed by 
 the Congress should reach the rank and file, unless it 
 
 went through the state authorities We had the 
 
 nullification turmoil, we had Aaron Burr, who attempted 
 rebellion, and we finally had the conflict that put an end 
 to it. Now I maintain that this bourgeois history is the 
 pedestal on which we stand. Revolution does not mean 
 to break off with the past ; we are children of the past 
 and what we are laboring for here upon the industrial 
 field, the bourgeois capitalists have established before 
 us upon the political field, the political field dividing us 
 into states, the industrial field proposing to remove state 
 distinctions and establishing the industries on a newer 
 basis. ... The actions of the General Executive 
 Board shall be brought before the rank and file of each 
 organization, and while the industrial unions must have 
 autonomy in their private affairs, in affairs such as are 
 properly private they are to have autonomy, the 
 autonomy is destroyed absolutely upon matters of gen- 
 eral concern. ...» 
 
 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD 63 
 
 The General Executive Board has wielded, in the 
 last few years, greater power than was originally 
 intended. This is probably due to outside causes. 
 The Industrial Workers, instead of mapping out or- 
 ganization and following well-laid-out plans, has been 
 plunged into convulsive and sudden strikes in indus- 
 tries and districts where no organization existed. 
 
 The membership, based on cards issued, is 120,000. 
 The paid-up membership in 1913 was 30,347. The 
 Secretary reports that 
 
 the membership to-day consists almost wholly of un- 
 skilled workers. The bulk of the present membership 
 is m the following industries: Textile, steel, lumber, 
 mining, farming, and railroad construction. The ma- 
 jority of the workers in these industries, except the tex- 
 tile, travel from place to place following the different 
 seasons of work. They are therefore out of touch with 
 the organization for months at a period. « 
 
 To-day the Industrial Workers of the Worid holds 
 the uncontested place of friend of the industrial out- 
 cast, the unemployed, and the unemployable. The 
 Socialist Party at one time claimed that place, and 
 held that a tramp was not a person to be despised be- 
 cause he was a tramp; that a man who refused to 
 slave under capitalist exploitation deserves respect. 
 It is now common to hear the Socialist Party members, 
 with malice of thought, interpret the initials I. W. W. 
 as " I won't work." 
 
 It is not surprising that the Industrial Workers of 
 

 64 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 §!' 
 
 the World, at the end of its eighth year, does not 
 report a highly developed organization. It chose 
 as its field the hitherto least organizable element in 
 industry. It made its appeal and its plans to meet 
 those workers who were the least able to give it per- 
 manent support, or even substantial temporary sup- 
 port. Its revolutionary program was met by capital 
 and the courts with unrelenting opposition. Its at- 
 tacks on the trade union movement developed factional 
 disputes among the workers. Its agitation aroused 
 workers to sudden and unexpected revolt in various 
 parts of the country. Its free speech fights brought 
 it into conflicts which had to do with the question of 
 individual freedom rather than with labor organiza- 
 tion, although they were the preliminaries of labor 
 organization. It is impossible to predict whether it 
 will be able to develop its organization, or realize 
 the outline of organization it has before it. Its record 
 of the past three years, 1912 to 1914, is a record of 
 a national force rather than one of an organization. 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN 
 
 No evidence of policy of union discrimination— Lack of confi- 
 dence in her executive ability— Problem is not discrimina- 
 tion but the position of woman and attitude toward her— 
 Relation between unskilled and women workers— Her do- 
 mestic and industrial position related— W^omen not interested 
 m ^ permanent organization— Women good strikers— Wom- 
 en's Trade Union League. 
 
 For several reasons the organization of women wage- 
 earners is a subject apart from the organization of 
 workers as a whole. 
 
 There are no figures separating the membership of 
 unions according to sex ; all alike are wage-earners in 
 statistical reports. Although there are unquestion- 
 ably more men organized than women, there are also 
 more men than women in the more organizable trades. 
 The question of proportional membership of men and 
 women is an open one. It is hypothetical to state 
 that there is a policy of discrimination against the 
 unionizing of women. The American Federation of 
 Labor in its pledge of membership requires that no 
 discrimination shall be made on account of sex, creed, 
 or color in the local or federal unions directly de- 
 pendent on the National Executive Council. More- 
 over, wherever there is a demand on the Council for 
 
 65 
 

 
 f, 
 
 66 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 the organization of these unions there is no lack of 
 interest or effort on account of sex. It will be remem- 
 bered that the home rule policy of the Federation 
 leaves its international unions free to organize as 
 they elect within their jurisdiction. At the 19 13 
 convention of the Federation a per capita tax of one 
 per cent, was levied as a special assessment to defray 
 a campaign for the organization of women. 
 
 The national unions of the American Federation 
 differ in their attitude toward women, but it is prac- 
 tically impossible to fasten on any what could be 
 considered sex discrimination in admittance to mem- 
 bership. In exceptional instances are men and women 
 engaged in doing the same kind of work. As the 
 national unions of the American Federation organize 
 by crafts and by division of crafts, and as these crafts 
 and divisions represent a branch of an industry in 
 which either men or women are at work, proof of 
 discrimination could be deduced in the exceptional 
 cases only where men and women are doing the same 
 kind of work in one locality, and the men are or- 
 ganized and the women are not. There are probably 
 several exceptional instances, like the organization of 
 cigar packers. Both men and women pack cigars. 
 The men cigar packers who are organized in New 
 York opposed attempts to include the women in their 
 local union. They claimed that the women did 
 inferior work and that their scale could not be 
 raised to meet union requirements, but they did not 
 
 ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN 
 
 67 
 
 prove their claims to the satisfaction of the 
 women. 
 
 It is not unusual to find that a national union has 
 organized one craft and not another, although it has 
 been given jurisdiction over both. As an example: 
 The Hotel and Restaurant Employees' International 
 Alliance holds, for the American Federation, juris- 
 diction over cooks, waiters, bartenders, and chamber- 
 maids in hotels, restaurants, and saloons. The bar- 
 tenders of the country are organized out of all pro- 
 portion to the waiters. The bartenders are men, and 
 the waiters are men and women. It is not clear 
 whether this is due to neglect of the waiters, or to the 
 fact that the officers of the union are more interested 
 in bartenders, or whether they have found bartenders 
 less difficult to organize. 
 
 But discrimination against women as members of a 
 union is negligible. Where women are eager to or- 
 ganize they usually find it possible to secure the 
 cooperation of the union representing their trade. 
 
 The discrimination against women is within rather 
 than without the membership. Women are discour- 
 aged from taking an active part in the executive 
 affairs of organization. There are no women among 
 the national officers or the national executive of the 
 American Federation. In the in national unions 
 there is but one woman president. It would be rare 
 to find women presiding over a city or state organi- 
 zation. 
 
68 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 While the leaders of the Industrial Workers of the 
 World show confidence in the part women have taken 
 and will take in the industrial struggle, the women of 
 Lawrence, Mass., observed that the officers of the 
 local organization in that city have given them no 
 better opportunity for taking part in the administra- 
 tion of union affairs than have the men of the Ameri- 
 can Federation. 
 
 Labor union men are like other men : they are not 
 eager to trust office-holding to women. Labor union 
 women are like other women; they lack the courage 
 and determination to overcome the prevailing attitude 
 that women are unfit to assume executive responsi- 
 bility. It is the lack of the executive representation 
 of women rather than lack of membership in the 
 unions that endows the labor movement with a mascu- 
 line point of view and limits it to masculine ability. 
 The real problem of the organization of women 
 in labor unions is not discrimination, but the position 
 of women in their domestic relations and industry. 
 This is complicated by a special attitude assumed 
 toward women, of which their attitude toward them- 
 selves is a part. 
 
 The mass of wage-earning women are in trades 
 which yield the lowest scale of wages, where little 
 skill is required, and where a worker can be quickly 
 replaced by other workers. The manufacturing in- 
 dustries in which women work are subject to con- 
 stant change, to change in seasons of work, to change 
 
 ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN 
 
 69 
 
 in new methods of work, to change through the in- 
 troduction of machinery, to change in nationality and 
 sudden influxes of workers from other countries. 
 
 For obvious reasons, men as well as women work- 
 ing under conditions as unstable as they* are unprofit- 
 able are far less interested in building up permanent 
 organizations than are workers in the more perma- 
 nent trades; in the trades which require experience 
 and training, and which pay the highest wages. 
 
 A worker with training or skill is eager to protect 
 his special kind of property. The American Federa- 
 tion form of organization and its methods have an 
 obvious value to such a worker. It offers him a de- 
 fense against attack on his special property. It is 
 plainly worth the while of such a worker to invest in 
 the union of his trade or industry and to make 
 immediate sacrifices for the protection and for the 
 rewards for which the permanent form of organiza- 
 tion stands. It is also possible for him to pay union 
 dues out of his comparatively high rate of wages in 
 -amounts sufficiently large to insure the financing of 
 an organization. 
 
 On the other hand, it is extremely difficult to per- 
 suade workers who are not receiving a living wage, 
 or who are casually employed, to join an organiza- 
 tion which will require time, money, energy, and 
 many serious sacrifices for a reward in the future 
 which for them is certain only in its uncertainties. 
 Unlike the skilled worker, they have neither the mar- 
 
TO 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 gin out of which to pay dues nor the faith in the 
 future. To the workers without a trade future the 
 investment in a union is a speculative proposition. 
 
 This is the problem of unionizing the unskilled 
 worker, and, as the mass of women are unskilled, it is 
 in part the problem of the organization of women. 
 
 While the methods of the American Federation 
 appeal to the skilled worker, the Industrial Workers 
 propose to offer special inducements to the unskilled 
 worker by limiting dues and initiation fees. But 
 Iplacing even a minimum tax on the unskilled worker 
 Ldots not meet the uncertainties of casual employment. 
 The Industrial Workers have not yet shown, it may 
 be that they do not expect to show, that the lowest 
 paid workers can be interested in a permanent or- 
 ganization. Their provision for the transfer of a 
 worker from one trade or one industry to another 
 is a recognition of the uncertainties of the casually 
 employed. But it is too early in its history to judge 
 whether it can or cannot meet organization needs on 
 a treasury built up on contributions of the casual work- 
 ers. Its large strikes have been largely contributed 
 to by other labor and by Socialist organizations. 
 ~ — One important phase of industrial unionism, which 
 includes the lowest paid worker and the highest paid 
 in one union, is this question of financing the organi- 
 zation of the former. The higher dues of the better 
 paid workers might keep up a treasury without unduly 
 depending upon the workers who are unable to sup- 
 
 .1 
 
 ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN 
 
 71 
 
 port organization. But the unions of the Industrial 
 Workers have given no extended proof of the willing- 
 ness of skilled workers to financially back the un- 
 skilled. 
 
 But the problem of organizing women is only in 
 part the problem of organizing the unskilled worker. 
 The question of why more women are not members 
 of unions is only partially answered with the reasons 
 for lack of organization among the unskilled. There is 
 another phase of the problem which applies to all 
 wage-earning women, skilled and unskilled. It is 
 the woman's problem, and is a more distinctive part 
 of what is known as the women's movement than it 
 is a fully recognized part of the labor movement. 
 But it is a part of the latter, and affects wages as 
 well as the organization of all labor. 
 
 Men's domestic duties coincide with the perform- 
 ance of a day's work. Their day's work, moreover, 
 fulfils all domestic obligations. When men have com- 
 pleted a day's work for the boss, they have earned a 
 day's wage for the family, and have discharged their 
 obligation to both. 
 
 Wage-earning women give their time and strength 
 to industry as men give theirs, but women, unlike 
 men, are not relieved from home duties in conse- 
 quence. They are expected to settle home problems 
 and make home adjustments as they did before in- 
 dustry was transferred from homes to factories. 
 They perform their day's work in the factory in addi- 
 
 1 
 
Ill 
 
 i ■ 
 
 72 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 tion to their obligation at home. They go into in- 
 dustry, in short, not as competent wage-earners, with 
 the common needs of individual human beings, but 
 as helpers-out at home. They have little conception 
 of their place in industry and their relation to other 
 wage-earners, but they have a very present realization 
 of how they can help out at home. With this attitude 
 toward their work they readily accept a wage which 
 is an auxiliary wage, that is, a wage which supple- 
 ments the wages of others: a wage which does not 
 pay, but helps to pay, the rent; a wage which does 
 not cover, but helps to cover, the cost of the family 
 clothing. 
 
 This is not only a woman's attitude toward her 
 wage. It is the general attitude. The woman who is 
 thrown entirely on her own resources, who has no 
 one to help out, and no one to help her, is subject to 
 the same depressing influence of the prevailing attitude 
 toward women as is her sister who pools her earnings 
 with the members of her family. 
 
 No one expects a woman to take her wage-earning 
 seriously, or to consider it as a future occupation. 
 She is invited to indulge in the glittering generality* 
 that marriage will relieve her of all financial burdens. 
 If she is a wage-earning wife or daughter, she is ex- 
 pected to change her work to suit home conditions and 
 demands, which are seldom changed to suit her work. 
 This attitude toward women wage earners is more 
 serious in its effect on wages and her interest in the 
 
 ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN 
 
 73 
 
 problem of her fellow workers than is the actual bearing 
 of children. The eternal emphasis on a woman's 
 response to the demands of her family makes it diffi- 
 cult for her to realize the effect of her underbidding 
 her fellow workers in search of jobs, or her responsi- 
 bility to them. 
 
 The appeal to her to help build up an organization 
 for permanent protection is not met with the ready 
 response it might if she were master of her own time 
 and if the future were as clear for her as for her 
 brothers. Even as she answers the appeal to or- 
 ganize, she finds that it is difficult to attend union 
 meetings in addition to her household duties, which 
 must be done before or after the day's work in the 
 store or factory. 
 
 Many labor men are men first and unionists second. 
 Such men are often too annoyed at the thought of 
 women out of the home to face the danger which 
 threatens organization by leaving her free to shift for 
 herself and to meet organization of labor as she meets 
 capital, as best she can and in her own way. 
 
 The attitude toward the organization of women is 
 ^dependent upon the prevailing attitude of a locality. 
 The attitude of the union men of a locality is the 
 attitude of the other men toward women. The trade 
 union men of California, for instance, take the organi- 
 zation of women for granted, and welcome them in 
 administration affairs, while the trade union men of 
 New York are, at best, politely skeptical. 
 
M 
 
 74 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 r ■ J 
 
 In spite of the difficulties in the way of building 
 up permanent organizations in the trades where 
 women work, it is now a generally accepted fact 
 among all unionists that women make the best strikers. 
 They have answered the strike calls in all the recent 
 great strikes where women were involved, and in 
 these large strikes and in all others they are invariably 
 opposed to compromise in the settlement of the dis- 
 pute, and show a characteristic feminine tenacity 
 which is the most valuable asset in a striker. During 
 the silk workers' strike in Paterson, N. J., William D. 
 Haywood said: " It was the women of Lawrence who 
 won the Lawrence strike, and if the Paterson strike is 
 won, it will be the women who win it.'' The quality of 
 the revolutionist shows up in women on strike, and this 
 is as true of women of long union experience as it 
 is of the woman in her first rebellion against some 
 industrial oppression. On the contrary, the conser- 
 vatism of union men is supposed to increase with 
 experience. There may be several reasons for this: 
 women usually feel less responsibility about the future 
 of a union; they are not keen about a career and 
 do not care to hold office. A woman now and then 
 who makes the union her career develops, as the men 
 do, an official attitude toward the movement. But 
 there are other women who have served their unions 
 for a decade or more who never lose the militant spirit 
 which characterizes them as strikers. 
 
 The strike of Shirt Waist Makers in 1909 in New 
 
 
 f 
 
 / 
 
 ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN 75 
 
 York City was the first demonstration in the labor 
 movement of the possibility of organizing all the 
 women of a trade by calling a strike of the whole 
 trade in one locality. It was the strike of the Shirt 
 Waist Makers which gave the first great impetus to 
 the organization of the workers making women's 
 clothing and which placed at last the International 
 Ladies' Garment Workers' Union in its present posi- 
 tion,— -the third largest union affiliated with the 
 American Federation. This union has jurisdiction 
 over one of the largest fields in which women work. 
 It is officered by men who believe that women make 
 good strikers, but who have no confidence in their 
 ability to handle union aflFairs. They have gone 
 further than any other union in building up organiza- 
 tion by protocol agreements with manufacturers with- 
 out a conscious sentiment or understanding among the 
 workers. They claim that the workers as a whole have 
 no real conception of organization. 
 
 It is difficult to say how great a part of the increase 
 in organization of women is due to the Women's 
 Trade Union League. The League was organized 
 in recognition of the fact that woman's part in the 
 labor movement needed undivided attention. Its pur- 
 pose was to emphasize that need. In the ten years 
 of its existence the League has functioned as a 
 woman's as well as a labor organization. Its ex- 
 ecutive councils are made up of a majority of 
 
 I 
 

 7^ 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 trade union women who are members of the Ameri- 
 can Federation of Labor, but it has been materially 
 assisted in its work by women who have no trade 
 affiliations. 
 
 The League was tolerated in its early years, and 
 many trade union officers regarded it indulgently as 
 a passing whim. It is not so regarded to-day. 
 
 The League has been persistent, strenuous, militant. 
 It has kept its single purpose in mind, "the organiza- 
 tion of women into trade unions," until it has at last 
 convinced the most skeptical of its integrity. 
 
 Its work in the great Shirt Waist Strike in New 
 York, the Garment Workers in Chicago, and the Tele- 
 phone Operators in Boston, has given it a national 
 reputation, and has advertised, as no other single 
 force has advertised, the idea of organization for 
 women workers. 
 
 In the face of all difficulties the organization of 
 women in the last five years has advanced at an un- 
 precedented rate. The New York Labor Department 
 reports an increase in that state for 1913 of iii per 
 cent. It is interesting to observe in connection with 
 the increase the changes in the general attitude toward 
 women. 
 
 The President of the American Federation thus 
 writes in a confident tone of the woman's movement, 
 the organization of working women, and the superior 
 advantages of labor unions over other efforts to 
 improve the condition of women workers : 
 
 ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN yy 
 
 ... the forces that have contributed to the wom- 
 an movement have been increasing in scope and in- 
 tensity Women's education is no longer inferior to 
 that of men . . . the popular attitude toward women's 
 work has changed completely. . . . This woman move- 
 ment is a movement for liberty, freedom of action and 
 thought, tending toward a condition when women shall be 
 accorded equal independence and responsibility with men 
 equal freedom of work and self-expression, equal Wai 
 protection and rights. ^ 
 
 . . . we should view with apprehension present 
 sentiment in favor of setting up public and political 
 agencies for securing industrial benefits for wage-earn- 
 ing women. These agencies would constitute a restric- 
 tion upon freedom of action capable of serious abuses. 
 instead of aiding women in the struggle for industrial 
 betterment and freedom, we should be foisting upon them 
 fetters from which they would have to free themselves 
 in addition to the problems that now confront them and 
 we should still leave unsolved the problem essentikl to 
 real freedom—self-discipline, development of individual 
 responsibility and initiative. The industrial problems of 
 women are not isolated, but are inextricably associated 
 
 with those of men We cannot encourage too 
 
 enthusiastically or too fully efforts of women to help 
 themselves, to secure for themselves needed reforms 
 and to associate themselves in trade unions which pro- 
 tect individual freedom and promote the general well- 
 being. ^ 
 
!♦! 
 
 
 ■i 
 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 INDUSTRIAL AND TRADE ORGANIZATION 
 
 Forces which make for trade and for industrial organization- 
 Counter criticisms— Past efforts to form industrial unions- 
 Opportunity for choice of form of International A. F of L. 
 unions—" Autonomy Declaration " of A. F. of L.— Jurisdic- 
 tion disputes— Building Trades Department : industry divided 
 mto trades on the capital side; changes in processes; re- 
 duction of sympathetic movements— Metal Trades Depart- 
 ment: efforts to amalgamate; substitution of local indus- 
 trial agreements for trade— Railway Employees Depart- 
 ment: the "Federation of Federations "—Department of 
 Mines: sentiment against trade autonomy within the A. F. 
 of L.— Chicago Pressmen's strike— Strike of the Light, 
 Heat, and Power Council of California— A. F. of L. in- 
 dustrial unions: United Mine Workers; Western Federa- 
 tion; Brewery Workers— Industrial contract with capital- 
 Industrial unionism of I. W. W.— Where an industrial and 
 where a trade union functions. 
 
 When a wage earner discovers that, as an individual, 
 he is at a disadvantage in selling his labor; and that 
 this disadvantage is the outcome of his own compe- 
 tition with fellow workers for the same jobs, the dis- 
 covery places him in possession of the remedy, which 
 is combination. The sort of combination which logi- 
 C \cally follows his discovery is not combination with 
 ^1 wage earners, but with those who are after the 
 same jobs. Such combinations are the trade unions, 
 and such unions are simple business propositions, 
 
 78 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 79 
 
 ' 
 
 especially for those workers who pursue trades or 
 crafts which require some degree of experience and 
 training. 
 
 It was in the nature of the situation that the workers 
 who followed a trade which required skill and train- 
 ing would be interested in propositions for the preser- 
 vation of trade standards, and that workers without 
 special skill would show less concern. As skilled 
 workers can earn more at their own trade than at any 
 other kind of labor, the keeping up of the wage level 
 is to them a matter of life interest. It is true, as a 
 general proposition, that organization by trade, and 
 permanent organization of any sort, has appealed to 
 workers according as they have little or much to gain 
 in the trade they follow. 
 
 Trade union combination is so obviously superior to 
 the competition of individuals looking for work that 
 workers, under stress of intense competition, would 
 have combined almost instinctively if their combina- 
 tions had not met the drastic opposition of those who 
 controlled the distribution of the jobs. 
 
 The trade form of organization not only follows 
 the impulse for combination under stress of competi- 
 tion, but it follows individual preferences in the asso- 
 ciation of men of similar equipment and social stand- 
 ing. All other things being equal, machinists as a 
 group would be more harmonious than a mixed group 
 of machinists and shoe operators : or carpenters would 
 appreciate association with other carpenters more than 
 
8o 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 mi 
 
 association with the various sorts of employees in a 
 department store. The trade union is in this sense 
 an instinctive form of organization, and, as it 
 follows individual preferences, it is the primitive form 
 of the existing labor combinations. Herein lies the 
 strength and the weakness of " pure and simple " ^ 
 trade unionism. 
 
 The industrial union is based on the labor group- 
 ings which capital creates for the manufacture and 
 distribution of a commodity or of commodities of a 
 similar character in competition or use. The indus- 
 trial unionists not only disregard the personal prefer- 
 ences for association, but they set themselves the task 
 of overcoming those preferences and creating in their 
 place new desires for association based on class inter- 
 ests which develop in the struggle for control of indus- 
 try; for industrial freedom. In this sense the indus- 
 trial union is the sophisticated form of organization. 
 The industrial union may provide for the subsidiary 
 association of craft workers who are in direct com- 
 petition, but these trade groups are auxiliary and 
 incidental to the industrial group of which the trade 
 is a part. While the trade unionist conceives of a job 
 as a thing in itself, the industrial unionist realizes 
 that it is a part of a process. In other words, the 
 unit of organization for labor, as it is for capital, is 
 the industry in which workers, representing possibly 
 several trades, are associated for the manufacture 
 of a product. Some industries are comparatively 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 8i 
 
 simple in their processes, and the membership of an 
 industrial union is therefore not necessarily complex 
 or inclusive of several trades. 
 
 Whether an industry is complex or simple in its 
 working force, whatever may be the divisions of the 
 processes, it is capital and not labor which determines 
 and directs it. Capital decides what kind of workers 
 are to be employed and employs them. As capital 
 sees fit it discharges them. It changes the processes 
 and the kinds of workers. As capital regards the 
 whole group with a single eye so would the industrial 
 unionist regard capital. From an organization point 
 of view, labor is weak or strong, in agreement with 
 capital, or in rebellion against it, as it includes every 
 worker which capital has considered of sufficient im- 
 portance to employ. 
 
 The industrial unionist lays stress on the importance 
 of change in the form of organization so that it will! 
 correspond to the changes in modern industry. He is^ 
 apt to assume that an age has arrived in which all ' 
 industrial processes have reached a maximum state of 
 concentration and simplicity. While this is far from 
 the truth, concentration is a characteristic of modern 
 industry. It is of the first importance to labor organi- 
 zation that new methods of management, no less than 
 new machinery, are creating new trades, and that they 
 are re-creating and destroying old ones. The crea- 
 tion of a new trade or the destruction of an old trade 
 was at one time an event of historic importance; 
 
82 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 83 
 
 I ' 
 
 to-day it receives not much more than passing comment 
 in newspaper notice. The industrial unionist charges 
 that the trade form of organization is as ill equipped 
 to fight present-day battles as were the gilds to repre- 
 sent the interests of the journeymen a hundred and 
 fifty years ago. The industrial unionist thus chal- 
 lenges the trade unionist, placing him on the defen- 
 sive. 
 
 The trade unionist takes up the challenge. The 
 defense is the accomplishments and growth of the 
 trade unions, particularly during the last quarter of 
 a century. In the face of powerful opposition, it is 
 the trade union that has shortened hours of labor and 
 increased and maintained wage rates, if not real 
 wages, for unnumbered workers. It has kept before 
 the workers of the country the principle of combina- 
 tion, and has fought incessantly to establish and hold 
 the right. It denies that industrial organization will 
 successfully coordinate all groups of workers. It 
 claims that trade autonomy with federation of trade 
 unions is meeting the modern conditions imposed on 
 labor. 
 
 The Railroad Brotherhoods and the controlling fac- 
 tion of the American Federation of Labor represent 
 these claims. The latter organization can point to 
 the trials which it has made in the past in industrial 
 organization, which were relinquished for the pure 
 trade form, as in the case of the printing trade. In 
 1873 the pressmen separated from the compositors 
 
 and formed a craft union, on the ground that their 
 interests were overlooked and outvoted. Twelve 
 years later the stereotypers also withdrew and formed 
 their own independent union. The year following the 
 bookbinders set up for themselves. They all are 
 to-day allied through printing trades councils, but their 
 bargaining is conducted independently, and their al- 
 liance precludes sympathetic strike action. 
 
 It is often not realized that a large number of inter- 
 national unions of the American Federation have 
 jurisdiction over several related trades of an industry 
 and even of related industries. For instance, the 
 longshoremen control about forty different and dis- 
 tinct trades in the general business of transportation. 
 While these are included under one charter, issued by 
 the American Federation, they are distinct trade or 
 craft groups of the International Longshoremen, Ma- 
 rine and Transport Workers' Association. The Hotel 
 and Restaurant Employees' International Alliance and 
 Bartenders' International League is one organization, 
 including not all but several groups of workers em- 
 ployed in hotels and restaurants. The cooks, the 
 waiters, the bartenders, all members of the organiza- 
 tion, in making agreement or in strike act independently 
 of each other. But the independence of trades within 
 this or the other international trades union is a policy 
 determined by each national union within its limits of 
 jurisdiction. 
 
 It is important to understand the changes and transi- 
 
84 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 'I 
 
 ■,J' 
 
 t 
 
 ! 
 
 1 * 
 
 
 S' 
 
 i1 
 
 tions which are taking place within the American Fed- 
 eration which, it is claimed, meet the objections of 
 industrial unionists to the general trade union policy. 
 The officers of the Federation repeatedly assert that 
 there is nothing in the construction of the American 
 Federation which prevents each international union 
 from adopting industrial organization within its own 
 province, or amalgamating with other international 
 unions, so long as it does not challenge the jurisdic- 
 tion of another international. This is the crux of the 
 dispute between the industrial and trade union advo- 
 cates within the membership of the Federation. The 
 administration cherishes the trade form and tolerates 
 the industrial form only when those most concerned 
 resolutely stand for the latter. The effort of indus- 
 trial unionist members is to reverse this position, or 
 even to force the trade unionists to relinquish their 
 position, however much they may be concerned to 
 hold it. In 1901 the American Federation of Labor 
 issued what it calls its " Autonomy Declaration," as 
 follows : 
 
 As the magnificent growth of the American Federa- 
 tion of Labor is conceded by all students of economic 
 thought to be the result of organization on trade lines, 
 and believing it neither necessary nor expedient to make 
 any radical departure from this fundamental principle, 
 we declare that as a general proposition the interests 
 of the workers will be best conserved by adhering as 
 closely to that doctrine as the recent great changes in 
 methods of production and employment make practicable. 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 85 
 
 However, owing to the isolation of some few industries 
 from thickly populated centers where the overflowing 
 number follow one branch thereof, and owing to the 
 fact in some industries comparatively few workers are 
 engaged over whom separate organizations claim juris- 
 diction, we believe that jurisdiction in such industries 
 by the paramount organization would yield the best re- 
 sults to the workers therein, at least until the develop- 
 ment of organization of each branch has reached a stage 
 wherein these may be placed without material injury to 
 all parties in interest in affiliation with their national 
 trade unions. . . . We hold that the interests of the 
 trade-union movement will be promoted by closely 
 allied and subdivided crafts giving consideration to 
 amalgamation, and to the organization of District and 
 National Trade Councils to which should be referred 
 questions in dispute, and which should be adjusted within 
 allied crafts' lines.^ 
 
 Eleven years later this declaration was reaffirmed, 
 and stands to-day as the official word on the subject 
 of trade and industrial organization. It is evident 
 that the district and national councils or departments 
 referred to were intended as clearing houses for juris- 
 dictional disputes between the national unions. How- 
 ever, these trade departments which have been created 
 are commonly regarded by the membership as the sub- 
 stitute for proposed schemes of industrial organiza- 
 tion. The functioning of these departments is for that 
 reason important. 
 
 The four trade departments are the building, metal, 
 mining, and railroad. Before the proposition was 
 made to create a National Building Trades Depart- 
 
86 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 ii 
 
 iH 
 
 If- 
 
 li 
 
 ment, local building trades councils, made up of union 
 representatives of all the trades employed in the build- 
 ing industry, had had years of experience in dealing 
 with disputes of related unions. The building indus- 
 try in all large centers of important building opera- 
 tion has furnished fertile soil for disputes between 
 craftsmen over their respective rights to a job and 
 between unions claiming their trade rights. The intro- 
 duction of new methods of construction, new tools, 
 new materials for old purposes and new uses for 
 materials is the normal condition of the industry. 
 As the overlapping and shifting of trade lines vary 
 in almost every building operation, the union conflicts 
 have been local. The changes which architects intro- 
 duce in their specification for practically every opera- 
 tion of importance cut across the trade lines marked 
 out by trade union organization, split up organiza- 
 tion divisions, and even create new trades over which 
 no one local more than another can claim jurisdiction. 
 In disputes over the disposition of a job the mem- 
 bers of a union look to their officers to see that their 
 claims are won. Carpenters who have been in the habit 
 of hanging doors expect their officers to see to it that the 
 job is not given to metal workers because the doors 
 required in the specifications happen to be metal. But 
 the metal workers claim that all work done in metal 
 belongs to them and that carpenters are workers in 
 wood. Such disputes may seem trivial, but it is a 
 matter of bread and butter to the carpenters and the 
 
 87 
 
 metal workers concerned. It is a matter of impor- 
 tance to the unions, marked out as they are on trade 
 lines. Whichever union fails to win out finds that its 
 standing is so much the weaker with its members. As 
 there is no satisfactory basis for the settlement of 
 disputes over arbitrary divisions, many of the local 
 councils have resorted to arbitration, or even have 
 inserted provisions in trade agreements that no strike 
 shall occur because of jurisdictional disputes. While 
 arbitration reduces friction between workers and em- 
 ployers, and prevents the interruption of building 
 operations, it has not settled the problem for the 
 unions; that is, it has not disposed of the friction within 
 the unions as well as between them. The industrial 
 union not recognizing trade divisions, but regarding 
 each operation as a whole, would leave the burden of 
 dividing up the work to the architects or contractors 
 and avoid internal union dissension. 
 
 The proposition of industrial unionists to include 
 all the workers in an industry under one contract 
 would not apply to the building industry, where capi- 
 tal is disorganized and represented by trade divisions. 
 There are in the industry contractors for electrical 
 work, for masonry, for plumbing, for painting and 
 so on. Each contractor employs tradesmen, and it is 
 with these trade contractors that unionists must deal 
 separately, however much they might prefer to make 
 one industrial contract covering all artizans. 
 
 These divisions on the employing side of the indus- 
 
88 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 
 I 
 
 \lv 
 
 try have made difficulties for the trade unions in the 
 enforcement, as well as in the making, of contracts. 
 Such difficulties have been met at different periods 
 in the way that an industrial union, not bent on the 
 making of contracts, would have met them; that is, 
 by sympathetic strike action. The local councils at 
 times were the means of making sympathetic strikes 
 effective. The points at issue were frequently won 
 by the men, often enough, at least, to make the sym- 
 pathetic strike from time to time a feature of building 
 operations. But sympathetic strikes are not conducive 
 to a policy of trade, or, for that matter, a policy of 
 industrial agreements between labor and capital. The 
 building trades unions were eager to establish con- 
 tractual relations with employers. A reaction against 
 the sympathetic strike method was inevitable. 
 
 The Building Trades Department of the American 
 Federation considers that its most important function 
 is to accomplish the peaceful settlement of all disputes 
 and so increase opportunities for trade bargaining. 
 It reported in 1912 that it has been successful in pro- 
 moting a higher type of contractual relations between 
 the contractors in the building trades and the inter- 
 national unions than has ever been known. " That 
 we have been in large measure successful in this 
 direction is amply illustrated in the admittedly notice- 
 able reduction of sympathetic movements during the 
 year just closed. We are, so to speak, occupying a 
 position in a new era, one in which questions of 
 
 -h 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 89 
 
 gravity still confront us, of sufficient force and con- 
 plexity to almost warrant radical action, and surely 
 would have so resulted a few years ago. Happily 
 now, however, through the medium of the Depart- 
 ment, the contestants in overlapping trade disputes meet 
 in conference and reach either a mutually agreeable 
 understanding or a postponement of contemplated 
 action until a more appropriate opportunity, indulg- 
 ing the hope meanwhile that the mellowing influ- 
 ences of time and reason will work out a solution of 
 the issues that temporarily estrange them . . . we have 
 . . . more nearly approached an equilibrium in the 
 maintenance of contract or agreement relations with 
 the builders and contractors of the country than has 
 been known since the introduction of machinery and 
 machinery made products." ^ 
 
 It is evident that strikes had become a serious issue 
 to the Department, more serious than the friction 
 between the craft unions. When we leave a problem 
 to " the mellowing influences of time " it would seem 
 that we are weary of it rather than attacking it, 
 especially when it is a " question of gravity " which 
 " almost warrants radical action." 
 
 There is a movement within the Metal Trades Union 
 against the policy of trade autonomy in matters of 
 collective bargaining; another movement is toward 
 amalgamation of trade organizations. Still another 
 movement contemplated sympathetic action between 
 the several unions represented in an industry. These 
 
Mil 
 
 ,1' 
 
 90 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 
 movements are expressed in resolutions presented by 
 delegates from all parts of the country to the 19 13 
 convention of the Metal Trades Department. The 
 president of the Department in making his report told 
 the delegates, " There seems to be a general impres- 
 sion among the local unions of our affiliated inter- 
 nationals, and particularly in the minds of a great 
 number of the delegates of the local Metal Trades 
 Councils, that the Metal Trades Department is em- 
 powered with authority to order strikes and to involve 
 our affiliated unions in trade movements looking 
 toward, first, a reduction in the hours of labor; 
 second, an increase in wages; third, uniform condi- 
 tions of employment; and fourth, sympathetic 
 strikes." ' 
 
 The resolutions presented by the delegates at the 
 same convention show less a misconception of the pur- 
 poses of the Department than a desire to change them. 
 It is evident that the president realized that the resolu- 
 tions were evidence of dissatisfaction with trade di- 
 visions and autonomy of international trade unions. 
 In place of the radical propositions of the delegates, 
 the president recommended an extension of friendly 
 relations and greater cooperation between the inter- 
 national unions and the trades councils and the De- 
 partment. In continuing he recommended the follow- 
 ing plan for consideration : " In localities where there 
 is a desire to inaugurate a general movement affecting 
 hours, wages, or conditions of employment that this 
 
 u 
 
 i 
 
 1» 
 
 t 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 91 
 
 Department be authorized to make a thorough inves- 
 tigation of the conditions prevailing in the city or 
 locality where the movement is started. The Depart- 
 ment to submit its findings, with such recommendation 
 as it desires to make, to the international organiza- 
 tions, and if the internationals agree with the recom- 
 mendations of the Department, a movement shall then 
 be inaugurated under the advice and jurisdiction of 
 the Department." * 
 
 There was nothing in the recommendation of the 
 president which suggests a curtailment of the power 
 or control of the international unions over their local 
 unions. The president's proposition leaves trade juris- 
 diction and trade autonomy unimpaired. It is the 
 characteristic position taken by the national officers of 
 the American Federation. 
 
 The intention of the delegates who offered resolu- 
 tions on the question of inter-union relations was 
 clearly opposed to the regular policy. They left no 
 doubt that they were standing for a new order, and 
 that they looked to their national Metal Trades De- 
 partment, representing the metal trades industries as 
 a whole, to take the lead. These resolutions are 
 important, as they are the clearest recorded expres- 
 sions from the membership of the craft unions of the 
 American Federation in favor of radical changes in 
 forms of organization. 
 
 In criticising the movement for change among the 
 members, the president said : 
 
92 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 At meetings of district organizations composed of 
 local metal trades councils and local lodges of interna- 
 tional organizations, located in the Detroit-Toledo terri- 
 tory and the Pittsburgh territory, resolutions have been 
 introduced looking toward an amalgamation of all the in- 
 ternational metal trades organizations. In some instances 
 they have been adopted, in others rejected. Similar reso- 
 lutions have been introduced in several of our inter- 
 national organizations' conventions, one of which is here 
 quoted . . . : " Realizing the inadequacy of the present 
 system of craft organization to protect the interests of 
 the members of the various metal trades unions against 
 the constant encroachment of the capital class, and 
 whereas the Metal Trades Councils and local unions in 
 the several states have moved the amalgamation of the 
 metal trades unions in one compact body to enable them 
 to better resist the unfair demands upon labor by or- 
 ganized capital; therefore, be it resolved. That this in- 
 ternational union in convention assembled endorse the 
 move to amalgamate all metal trades unions into one 
 compact body. . . ."* 
 
 The Metal Trades Council of Boston sent a resolu- 
 tion demanding that greater power be given local 
 trades councils and that laws be enacted compelling 
 all crafts to support a strike where one has been en- 
 dorsed by a majority of the metal trades involved and 
 sanctioned by their national unions, and local trades 
 council and Department. 
 
 The Metal Polishers* Union sent a resolution de- 
 manding that when the members of one trade union 
 are on strike that all who are members of other unions 
 and at work in the same shop be compelled to with- 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 93 
 
 draw from the shop during the strike of the aggrieved 
 union. 
 
 The resolutions sent to the convention by the Metal 
 Trades Council of Newark proposed changes in the 
 constitution of the Metal Trades Department which: 
 (i) would require all affiliated unions to quit work 
 in shops where strikes or lockouts affecting any one 
 union are in progress; (2) where two-thirds of the 
 unions in one territory vote to inaugurate a move- 
 ment to advance the interest of the trades, and where 
 they have secured the sanction of their national unions, 
 all other unions involved in the industries affected 
 shall be directed by the Metal Trades Department to 
 take part; (3) no union shall sign agreements govern- 
 ing shops until all affiliated unions of the Department 
 represented in the shops have come to an agreement. 
 These proposed changes were prefaced by a state- 
 ment which might have come from the most radical 
 exponents of industrial unionism: 
 
 The chief aim of a Metal Trades Council, as our 
 delegates see it, is the assistance and support, moral 
 and financial, they can render to each other in case of 
 emergency, where an injury to one shall become the just 
 injury of all. In this city, some three years ago, in one 
 of our largest factories, over five hundred union men 
 were employed at good wages under strictly union con- 
 ditions. The management decided to introduce the open 
 shop propaganda. They first started on the members of 
 the Iron Molders' Union, introduced machines with handy 
 men, placed unskilled labor on duplex machines, ktid off 
 
-w 
 
 n 
 
 94 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 P 
 
 f 
 
 I 
 
 W ' 
 
 the prominent union men, and finally made matters so 
 unpleasant that a strike was inaugurated; the battle 
 waged, but other trades looked on; claimed that they 
 were treated all right by the firm. They had no griev- 
 ance. When the Holders were practically beaten they 
 then laid off the Pattern Makers, over eighty in number. 
 This fight of the Pattern Makers is on for over two 
 years with no prospect of a settlement. Within the past 
 year the other trades in the plant (who had no grievance) 
 have been effectually squashed and the firm now claims 
 that they have won a glorious open-shop victory, while 
 we see good union men walking the streets with scabs 
 working in their places. Our Council feels that the 
 weapons used at present are antiquated, for if firms can 
 lick one trade after the other until we are wiped off, 
 where does our unity of action come in? We must in 
 future emergencies fight unitedly ; fight all at once if the 
 one great fundamental principle of organized labor is to 
 be maintained. . . .« 
 
 The resolution which the convention finally adopted, 
 and which stands as law, provides that seventy-five 
 per cent, of the international organizations repre- 
 sented by local unions in a district must sanction a 
 strike or a movement for improved conditions of the 
 local unions involved before action can be taken. The 
 international organizations which refuse to comply 
 with a strike order will be suspended from member- 
 ship in the Department of Metal Trades. No strikes 
 over jurisdiction will be permitted. No union will 
 sign an agreement governing shops where members of 
 affiliated unions are involved in a strike without the 
 consent of the Department. The revised law requires 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 9S 
 
 a concession of power from the internationals, but 
 leaves them still in the lead. The clause providing 
 against jurisdictional strikes is a step toward unity 
 of action between the craft organizations. Where 
 local district councils are sufficiently strong the inter- 
 pretation of the new law will probably result in indus- 
 trial rather than independent trade action; that is, 
 there will be joint action of all the trades involved 
 in a local industry or all the trades in a single estab- 
 lishment for improved conditions or in times of strike 
 for whatever cause. This action of the Department 
 has not satisfied the rank and file. A convention 
 of the Metal Trades was held a year later, 1914, which 
 considered the formation of machinists in depart- 
 ments allied with the industry in which they worked. 
 The point was made that the machinists could, by 
 striking in sympathy, tie up an industry in times of 
 dispute between the workers of the industry and their 
 employers. Also, plans for the amalgamation of all 
 the metal trades were formally received. 
 
 A reorganization of the Railroad Employees' De- 
 partment of the American Federation of Labor fol- 
 lowed a convention called in 19 12 for federation of 
 all railroad workers. This Federation of Federa- 
 tions, as the movement was called, was precipitated 
 by the sympathetic strike action of related crafts 
 working in the railroad shops of the Harriman and 
 Illinois Central lines. The international officers were 
 forced to endorse the strike of their local unions in- 
 
96 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 W 
 
 
 :t 
 
 volving 31,000 shopmen and to adopt a policy for 
 concerted action between the workers on the system 
 irrespective of their craft divisions. After the con- 
 vention the Railroad Employees' Department reor- 
 ganized and adopted a constitution which was sub- 
 stantially the same as the one endorsed at the conven- 
 tion. It recites that 
 
 We, the members of the various labor organizations, 
 engaged in the railway industry, recognize the necessity 
 of establishing closer affiliations . . . that our individ- 
 ual craft efforts are no longer sufficient to afford us the 
 protection necessary. . . . The Railroad Employees' 
 Department aims to bring within this organization all 
 railway employees; to shorten the hours of labor to 
 eight hours per day ; to establish a minimum wage scale 
 for all employees in all branches of railway service; to 
 bring about a national agreement. . . . The operation 
 of railways coming more and more under the supervision 
 of the government, the standardization of freight and 
 passenger rates makes for the standardization of pay for 
 employees on all roads. Hence the necessity of a na- 
 tional agreement which may if necessary be divided into 
 sections; to prevent strikes and lockouts whenever pos- 
 sible. ' 
 
 It was hoped that the Railroad Brotherhoods, which 
 are independent of the unions of the American Fed- 
 eration, would surrender their independence and join 
 the movement for federation of all railroad workers. 
 The hope has not been realized, and the movement 
 for federation and concerted action among the rail- 
 road shopmen, and the same movement of the men 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 97 
 
 employed in train service, are as distinct as they have 
 always been. The movement among the shop workers 
 has not become national except in name and intention. 
 The secretary of the Department under date of Feb- 
 ruary 16, 1914, writes: 
 
 At the present time there are a large number of sys- 
 tem federations not affiliated with the Department, each 
 system making their own agreements with the manage- 
 ment through their Advisory Board members not to ex- 
 ceed five members from each craft. In our present some- 
 what scattered condition we are prevented from promot- 
 ing the functions of the Department and putting into 
 effect the full measure of beneficial results that would 
 obtain from a unity of interests with all federations. 
 These conditions are being gradually overcome and I 
 look for rapid strides in that direction at the coming con- 
 vention, when the laws will no doubt be so amended to 
 overcome any objections and to meet the requirements 
 of a formidable organization. ® 
 
 In September, 1913, there were thirty-five feder- 
 ated agreements with single railroad systems cover- 
 ing usually five crafts: the machinists, the boiler- 
 makers, blacksmiths, sheet-metal workers, and car- 
 men. 
 
 The movement of the railroad shopmen for joint 
 action between craft unions is local and from the 
 membership, as is the same movement among the metal 
 workers. It is not an official, but a rank and file 
 inspiration, and is sufficiently strong to modify official 
 policy. 
 
98 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ) I 
 
 The creation of a Department of Mines is not par- 
 ticularly significant as an industrial movement within 
 the Federation, as the two most important national 
 unions in the Department are themselves industrial 
 unions. Moreover, the mining of coal and metals 
 has no industrial connection. Metal miners do be- 
 come coal miners and coal miners metal miners, but 
 the products of the different mines are not commutable 
 and the capitalization of the industries vary. While 
 the affiliation of the coal miners' union and the metal 
 miners' is not an industrial move, the proposed amal- 
 gamation of the two organizations may have an im- 
 portant bearing on the industrial movement within 
 the American Federation. 
 
 The creation of the national trades departments 
 in the Federation is significant, but does not indicate 
 an effort on the part of the administration to modify 
 trade lines and trade autonomy. The departments 
 represent the effort of national officers to curb and 
 control the local movements, which disregard or at- 
 tempt to break down trade divisions. 
 
 The official sentiment in favor of trade autonomy 
 was registered at the last two conventions of the 
 American Federation. At the 19 12 convention the 
 issue appeared when the Printing Pressmen laid the 
 story of their Chicago strike before the delegates. 
 The Chicago Pressmen had struck, the printers and 
 stereotypers had struck in sympathy. The respective 
 international unions of the latter ordered the printers 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 99 
 
 and stereotypers back to work on the ground that they 
 had struck without the sanction of their national 
 unions and had broken their contracts with their em- 
 ployers. Those two craft organizations had made, as 
 was their custom, separate and independent contracts 
 with the Newspaper Publishers' Association. These 
 contracts, according to the policy of their international 
 union, they were bound to respect regardless of the 
 interests of the Pressmen. The Pressmen were also 
 severely criticised for striking, but whether they had 
 or had not observed the ethics of contracting was quite 
 another matter. The issue was clearly between those 
 who rated the importance of a trade agreement be- 
 tween a union and the employers above the solidarity 
 of labor in times of strife. The Pressmen introduced 
 a resolution, which was lost, providing for joint action 
 of all unions represented in a single industry. It was 
 rejected on the ground that it did not conform to the 
 " Autonomy Declaration " given above. 
 
 When the issue came up at the 19 13 convention it 
 was over the strike against the Pacific Gas and Elec- 
 trie Company of California. The strike was inaug- 
 urated by the Light, Heat, and Power Council of 
 California, which includes the members of local trade 
 unions working together in the industry. The trade 
 unions with a single exception were affiliated with the 
 international unions of the American Federation. The 
 exception was the union of electrical workers, which 
 was the rival of the Brotherhood of Electrical 
 
lOO 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 lOI 
 
 I ~ 
 
 !■ ) 
 
 Workers of the American Federation. During the 
 strike the Federation's Electrical organization fur- 
 nished the company with workers from its own or- 
 ganization to take the place of the electrical workers 
 on strike. Scabbing is usually considered the sin of 
 sins by labor unions, and this was official scabbing, one 
 degree worse in the mind of the California men than 
 the scabbing of an individual worker. The represen- 
 tatives of the Light, Heat, and Power Council asked 
 the Federation to condemn the action of the Brother- 
 hood of Electrical Workers in furnishing strike- 
 breakers, and to endorse the strike. But the conven- 
 tion, composed principally of international officers, re- 
 fused. Official scabbing in a strike was not as great 
 a crime as was the official support of a rival or dual 
 organization. But local sentiment was too strong for 
 the issue to drop in convention. The president of the 
 Federation in a later conference with all the organiza- 
 tions concerned, effected a significant compromise. It 
 appeared that the Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 
 was opposed to the policy of joint action of local 
 unions such as had been taken by the unions of the 
 crafts composing the Light, Heat, and Power Council. 
 The Brotherhood was forced to retract its position, 
 and the rival union of electrical workers agreed to 
 become a part of the Brotherhood of Electrical 
 Workers. This was a signal victory for industrial 
 solidarity. 
 The above illustrations show that the movement 
 
 within the American Federation for closer associa- 
 tion of craft workers comes from the membership, 
 which in some cases has forced official recognition 
 and adoption. 
 
 The official movement for industrial organization 
 is the movement led by the three unions of the Fed- 
 eration which are recognized as industrial : the United 
 Mine Workers (coal miners), the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners (metal miners), and the Brewery 
 Workers' Union. 
 
 Attention was called to the fact that the Federation 
 has given jurisdictional rights to several international 
 unions over a whole industry ; that so far as the Fed- 
 eration is concerned these international unions may 
 organize on industrial lines or may break up into 
 trade divisions, provided they do not encroach on the 
 territory of another international union chartered by 
 the Federation. This provision against encroachment 
 on assigned territory makes industrial organization 
 impossible except in industries where similar processes 
 complete the product, or where skilled craftsmen are 
 not required or are unimportant. Jurisdictional lines 
 are carefully guarded for such important craftsmen as 
 engineers, electricians, carpenters, plumbers, and other 
 workers whose artizanship has been well established, 
 and whose unions are strong. The recognized indus- 
 trial unions of the Federation are those whose claim 
 to jurisdiction over all the various artizans, skilled 
 and unskilled, working in the industry, has been con- 
 

 I02 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 l!!f 
 
 If 
 
 l> ■■■* I 
 
 ceded, and which include the whole group of workers 
 irrespective of their trade divisions. 
 
 The United Mine Workers were granted jurisdic- 
 tion over all workers of whatever crafts who were em- 
 ployed in or around the mines. The explanation for 
 this departure is that the mines are isolated; that the 
 men mining the coal are the dominating labor element; 
 that the miners could do more for the organization 
 of the scattered workers of other crafts than their 
 own craft union could accomplish. 
 
 The charter was granted to the Western Federation 
 of Miners on the same basis, and it was only on that 
 basis that the Western Federation consented, after 
 years of opposition, to re-affiliate with the American 
 Federation of Labor and its policy of craft unions and 
 trade agreements. One of the arguments used to in- 
 duce the Western Federation to vote for affiliation was 
 that as members they could do more to change the 
 policy of the American Federation from a trade to 
 an industrial policy than they could by outside opposi- 
 tion. 
 
 The Brewery Workers, in the early period of its 
 affiliation with the American Federation, outlined for 
 itself an industrial form of organization. As it was 
 one of the first unions chartered by the Federation 
 there were in the early years no claims of other unions 
 for jurisdiction over any artizans working in and 
 around the breweries. As early as 1887 the secretary 
 said: 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 103 
 
 * Experience in our struggles has taught us what 
 solidarity means. If the drivers, the coopers, the 
 engineers, the firemen, the maltsters had helped us, 
 our victory would have been assured within twenty- 
 four hours . . . not only are the brewers depend- 
 ent upon these branches, no — each is dependent upon 
 the others. Solidarity, man for man from roof 
 to cellar, all for each and each for all, this 
 alone can secure our future." • The position of the 
 secretary was endorsed, and the regulation adopted 
 which gave the various crafts involved in the manu- 
 facture of beer representation on the Executive Coun- 
 cil. The employers realized, also, that the inclusion 
 of all their workers " from roof to cellar " placed the 
 union in a position of advantage. When the Ameri- 
 can Federation granted charters to craft unions which 
 included the crafts working around the breweries and 
 in conjunction with the brewers, the brewery owners 
 did their part to encourage the dispute over jurisdic- 
 tional rights. These disputes have never been com- 
 pletely disposed of. The fights have been carried back 
 and forth through the conventions of the Brewery 
 Workers, through the unions of the other crafts in- 
 volved, and the conventions and executive councils of 
 the Federation. The latter in 1900 endorsed the gen- 
 eral principle of industrial organization for the brew- 
 ers. It later, under pressure of the other national 
 craft unions, decided that the brewers were not en- 
 titled to their industrial claims. The Brewery Workers 
 
IQ4 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 i 
 
 refused to recognize this decision and were expelled. 
 But many firemen, engineers, and other artizans re- 
 fused to join their craft unions and insisted on their 
 membership in the Brewery Workers. Many local 
 city organizations of the American Federation sided 
 with the brewers and the charter was at last returned. 
 Before this reversal, the Brewery Workers issued a 
 statement, of which the following is a part: "The 
 Brewery Workers have not demanded anything more 
 than was conceded to the organizations of coal miners, 
 longshoremen, seamen, and other organizations; the 
 unions named demand for their membership the engi- 
 neers and firemen employed in the mines, on the docks 
 and on the ships on rivers, lakes, and ocean." " 
 
 The Brewery Workers' historian writes " Thus 
 the jurisdiction question was settled in principle, but 
 this was far from ending the actual strife. On the 
 contrary, the trade unions concerned continued to do 
 all in their power to injure the brewers' organiza- 
 tion." " Strikes of Brewery Workers were precipi- 
 tated and the opposing craft unions furnished strike 
 breakers at lower wages. Conventions are still re- 
 cording these craft disputes. The 191 3 convention 
 of the American Federation was endeavoring to ad- 
 just the difficulties between the Brewery Workers* 
 Union and the Teamsters. This special dispute il- 
 lustrated the conflict which follows the extension of 
 an adversary. The Teamsters had been forced to re- 
 linquish the men who drove beer wagons, but now 
 
 105 
 
 i 
 
 they complained that men who hauled soft drinks 
 were members of the Brewery Workers' Union, and 
 they demanded that their claim to the latter be en- 
 dorsed and the Brewery Workers be forbidden the 
 invasion of another industry. The latter admitted 
 that it was an invasion, but not theirs; it was the brew- 
 ing industry that had invaded the manufacture of soft 
 drinks. The drivers were drivers for breweries and 
 they had nothing to do with what was loaded on their 
 particular wagon ; it might be beer or it might be gin- 
 ger ale. All they knew was that they were employed 
 by the brewery owners and were engaged to do the 
 driving. The convention decided to make no distinc- 
 tion between drivers who delivered mineral water and 
 those who delivered beer, so long as they were both 
 the product of a brewery. The drivers of mineral 
 water establishments, it was decided, should be mem- 
 bers of the Teamsters' Union. It was not decided at 
 what particular time a brewery ceases to be a brewery 
 and becomes a manufactory of mineral water, and the 
 dispute, it is safe to assume, is still unsettled. 
 
 The whole story of the Brewery Workers in re- 
 lation to industrial unionism is of peculiar importance. 
 It throws light on the relation between the form of a 
 labor union and the development of an industry which 
 has evolved from home manufacture to a high state of 
 capitalization and concentration and at last to the in- 
 clusion of related products. The story is important, 
 as the Brewery Workers have met a greater and more 
 
^amZ 
 
 
 « i 
 v„ i 
 
 :f I 
 
 'IT • 
 
 io6 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 persistent opposition from the craft unions than have 
 the miners. A reason for this is that their industry 
 is located in urban centers where craft unions are in 
 active operation. 
 
 The lines of organization of the three recognized 
 industrial unions of the American Federation, the 
 United Mine Workers of America, the Western Fed- 
 eration of Miners, and the Brewery Workers, as well 
 as of some of the local industrial councils, have fol- 
 lowed the lines marked out by capital in its develop- 
 ment of an industry. One company or one corpora- 
 tion employs all the workers engaged around a coal 
 mine or mines of one or many districts. So does one 
 organization seek to control all the men working for 
 the company or corporation and to deal with them as 
 parts of a whole just as the corporation deals 
 with them. The national union, representing all the 
 men working in and around the coal mines, seeks to 
 include all the coal miners of the country, and to deal 
 with associations of mine owners instead of with 
 single corporations. But it is not the effort to extend 
 the territory or to centralize the bargaining which dis- 
 tinguishes the Miners' Unions and the Brewery 
 Workers as industrial : the industrial feature is the in- 
 clusion of every worker employed in the industry 
 in the making of the agreements with the employers. 
 In the same way the district councils are indus- 
 trial when their agreements or their disagreements in- 
 clude each and every worker employed in the industry. 
 
 / 
 
 '/ 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 f 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 107 
 
 These organizations are examples of what may be 
 called the pure and simple industrial union, including 
 as they do all the workers employed in a single indus- 
 try. The purpose of the pure and simple industrial 
 union of the American Federation is the same as the 
 purpose of the pure and simple trade unions ; the mak- 
 ing of agreements with capital for conditions of em- 
 ployment. These unions regard the treaties with capi- 
 tal and each economic gain for the workers as im- 
 portant ends in themselves. Their effort is to make 
 treaties and avoid war whenever a labor gain can be 
 secured through peaceful bargaining or when a treaty 
 brings some token of gain to the industrial group. 
 
 The foregoing is a review of departures within the 
 Federation of Labor from the theory of one union 
 for every trade. It is found (i) that a number of 
 chartered national unions have been given jurisdiction 
 over all workers in one or even related industries 
 providing that they do not include workers who be- 
 long to another chartered union; (2) that local trade 
 unions through local district councils are making joint 
 industrial agreements and are taking other joint ac- 
 tion which disregard the interest of the trade group 
 where it conflicts with the industrial group; (3) that 
 there are three pure and simple industrial unions which 
 have retained in their membership workers whose 
 trade is represented in chartered trade unions. It is 
 also found that the first and third were advised, or 
 official movements, and the second a movement which 
 
io8 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 was forced by the rank and file; that the Trade Depart- 
 ments of building, metal, and railroads are reflections 
 of the district or rank and file movements and attempts 
 to regulate them and reconcile them with the prin- 
 ciples of trade autonomy and trade jurisdiction. 
 
 Having reviewed the movement for industrial or- 
 ganization within the American Federation, it re- 
 mains to turn again to the organization which has 
 recently popularized the idea of the industrial union, 
 which is the industrial unionism known to the public 
 generally outside of union circles. It is, indeed, the 
 claim of the I. W. W. that there is no industrial union- 
 ism except its own; that the "so-called industrial 
 union" of the American Federation diflfers in 
 important respect from the pure and simple trade 
 union. This, as has been shown, is not the case. 
 Moreover, a comparison of the industrial union de- 
 scribed in this chapter with the industrial union of the 
 Industrial Workers described in the chapter dealing 
 with that organization will show that in form, or con- 
 templated form of organization, the industrial unions 
 of the Industrial Workers of the World and the 
 American Federation of Labor are not radically 
 diflferent. The similarity, however, ends with the 
 form. 
 
 The purpose of the industrial unions of the Ameri- 
 can Federation is to contract with employers for con- 
 ditions of work, just as is the purpose of the trade 
 union. The industrial union to the Industrial Work- 
 
 ate^^amgtm^ 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 109 
 
 ers is not a treaty-making instrument, but an instru- 
 ment of war. In organizing its army on industrial in- 
 stead of craft lines, the purpose of the Industrial 
 Workers is to place class interests and revolutionary 
 intent above the personal and present interests of in- 
 dividual workers. Each strike is a skirmish in prep- 
 aration for the final conquest of industry. While the 
 Industrial Workers recognize a truce, figuratively 
 speaking it refuses to lay down its arms. The return 
 of men to work after a strike it regards as a truce, 
 never a treaty. The gains in conquest are not meas- 
 ured by increases in wages but by the army's spiritual 
 strength: in other words, the growth of the class 
 spirit, tested by its quickening response to the call for 
 action. * 
 
 As it happens there is a strong Socialist bias among 
 the members of the two miners' unions and the union 
 of the brewery workers. Some of them look to the 
 ballot rather than to the union for the final overthrow 
 of the capitalist system. The Western Federation of 
 Miners, until recently, held the position now advocated 
 by the Industrial Workers. They are reversing their 
 policy of no contracts with employers on the ground 
 that without contracts, or at least without union recog- 
 nition, they are powerless to prevent discrimination 
 against active members and a consequent disintegra- 
 tion in organization. 
 
 ♦ For fuller criticism and for scheme of industrial unionism of 
 I. W. W., see Chapter IV. 
 
V 
 
 i; i 
 
 no 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 The intention of industrial unionism may be either 
 to secure inter-union action between groups of related 
 workers of an industry for the purpose of strengthen- 
 ing the power of the group in the making of agree- 
 ments with capital, or to unite the related groups of an 
 industry for the purpose of developing class action, 
 and to depend solely on this development to force 
 concessions from capital without entering into con- 
 tract with it. 
 
 Where capital is organized throughout an industry, 
 as in mining and railroading, the organization of the 
 workers along industrial lines oflFers obviously the best 
 opportunity for collective bargaining. But in such 
 industries as building, where capital is divided by 
 trades, there is no such obvious advantage in the indus- 
 trial organization of the workers, as their bargaining 
 must follow trade lines. 
 
 Where, however, the object of industrial organiza- 
 tion is class action without intention or desire to 
 contract with capital, it is not important whether capi- 
 tal is organized on trade or industrial lines. The im- 
 portant consideration is the elimination of lines which 
 divide labor interests. 
 
 The allegiance of the more highly skilled artizans to 
 the trade form of organization is weakened as their 
 position as craftsmen is weakened, that is, as ma- 
 chinery and management reduce the craft to a lower 
 level of skill and artizanship. The trade unionist 
 delays the transformation. A craftsman quite natu- 
 
 \ 
 
 i 
 
 f 
 
 INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION 
 
 III 
 
 rally resists changes which accelerate the leveling of 
 his trade to semi-skilled or common labor. 
 
 The question which agitates unionists is how to keep 
 up the trade form of organization, to maintain wage 
 standards, and to accomplish the purpose of the indus- 
 trial organization, which is the amalgamation of in- 
 dustrial interests. The pure and simple industrial 
 union does not answer the question fully. Its answer 
 involves the whole proposition of sympathetic action 
 between all groups of workers, whether they be trade 
 or industrial in form of organization. 
 
 \ 
 
 ! 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 SYMPATHETIC STRIKE ACTION 
 
 What sympathetic action means— Stumbling blocks— Indeter- 
 minate contracts— Amalgamation— Industrialism— Position of 
 the " labor aristocracy "—Forces which make for and against 
 —Machinists' present position— Industrial unionism not 
 necessarily sympathetic action. 
 
 Industrial um^nism is closely allied to movements 
 for " sympathetic action " between groups. Industrial 
 unionism, in fact, is sympathetic action so far as it 
 goes; but it is not necessarily committed to sym- 
 pathetic action as a policy any more than is a pure 
 and simple trade union. A policy of sympathetic 
 action between trade unions or industrial unions de- 
 mands that related groups shall strike in sympathy 
 with other groups as their struggles with capital may 
 require. Obviously an unrestricted pursuit of this 
 policy would mean a general and continuous warfare. 
 Unions which advocate sympathetic strike action ad- 
 vocate the elimination of all union regulations which 
 place obstructions in the way of such action. 
 
 The first business of a union, given jurisdiction over 
 a trade or an industry, is to organize the workers 
 within its own territory. It may or it may not act 
 in conjunction with other unions. As a matter of 
 
 IIS 
 
 SYMPATHETIC STRIKE ACTION 113 
 
 history, autonomous unions with a prescribed territory 
 have found it necessary to rivet their attention on their 
 own affairs which have met the constant opposition 
 of employers. The American Federation looks to its 
 National Council and the city central bodies to de- 
 velop fraternal relations between unions along moral 
 and financial lines, but guards against sympathetic 
 strikes through national trade autonomy and juris- 
 dictional provisions. 
 
 Besides autonomy and jurisdictional provisions, the 
 relations which collective bargaining develops be- 
 come stumbling blocks to sympathetic strike action. 
 It is the universal experience of all labor unions that 
 successful contracting with capital precludes sympathy 
 strikes. Successful contracts, like other business rela- 
 tions, demand that each party to the contract hold 
 the interests involved in mutual esteem. The failure 
 of either party to do so jeopardizes future as well as 
 present relations. As has been said before, the na- 
 tional building trades movement, having experienced 
 the inconsistency, is now working for the elimination 
 of the sympathy strike, and the realization of perma- 
 nent bargaining relations with capital. 
 
 It is often suggested that indeterminate contracts 
 would make sympathy strikes possible; that a union 
 not under contract for a fixed period would be in a 
 position to strike in sympathy with another union 
 without breaking its agreement with an employer. 
 But the fixing of a time limit has very little to do with 
 
114 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 the strained relations which immediately develop be- 
 tween an employer and his workers who go on strike. 
 Under any condition, there are slim chances of suc- 
 cessfully maintaining business relations with em- 
 ployers and active sympathy with all sister unions at 
 one and the same time. 
 
 The industrial unions of the American Federation 
 propose to reconcile sympathetic action and contract- 
 ing with capital by the amalgamation of related groups 
 of an industry and the extending of the contract over 
 the whole group. Amalgamation for contracting pur- 
 poses is effective only where capital is concentrated or 
 well organized in an industry; it does not serve the 
 purpose of collective bargaining where it is divided, 
 as in the building trades. Moreover, the amalgama- 
 tion of the trades of an industry does not eliminate 
 the demand for sympathetic action between related 
 industries. This was realized by the coal miners dur- 
 ing their strike in the northern coal fields of Colorado. 
 While every man who worked in and around the 
 mines, when the strike was ordered, went out and 
 remained out, they complained that the operators were 
 aided in their efforts to break the strike by men who 
 were members of other unions. Union carpenters 
 from Denver, working under an agreement with Den- 
 ver contractors, built the pens for the protection of 
 strike-breakers. Also, union men working on the rail- 
 roads hauled the coal mined by the strike-breakers. 
 The miners observed that their union was industrially 
 
 SYMPATHETIC STRIKE ACTION nS 
 
 organized; that every man employed by the mining 
 company had struck; but that their strike needed as 
 well the co-operation of other unions ; that sympathetic 
 strike action is as important to an industrial union as 
 it is to a trade union. It was also observed that an 
 industrial union like the coal miners was in no better 
 position to strike in sympathy with other unions than 
 is a trade union. During the strike in the Illinois 
 Central railroad shops, union miners supplied the road 
 
 with coal. 
 
 The demand for sympathetic action comes invari- 
 ably from groups of workers who find themselves in a 
 weak position either permanently or temporarily as in 
 time of strikes. It comes from workers who are 
 conscious of their inability to meet alone the exigencies 
 of organization. It is common to hear highly skilled 
 craftsmen, or the members of well established unions, 
 called the " aristocracy of labor." It is an accurate 
 description of the alienation between organized groups 
 where interests divide and opposing lines of action 
 
 develop. 
 
 There is actually more sympathy between a well 
 established labor union and a corporation entering 
 into contract with it than there is between the same 
 union and groups of casually organized migratory 
 workers or unemployed men demanding work in mass 
 action. It is common to find that such unionists are 
 as scornful of the efforts of these men as is the 
 United States Steel Corporation scornful of efforts 
 
ii6 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 among their employees at organization or even the 
 efforts of the American Federation to organize them. 
 This attitude of superiority of union men and their 
 ahenation is bitterly criticised by the less fortunately 
 placed workers. It is to them a clear failure to live 
 up to professions of fraternity; to the injunction, 
 " The interest of one is the interest of all." 
 
 It is not alv^rays realized that this demand for un- 
 limited sympathy means a complete sacrifice of the 
 few privileges and decencies which restricted union 
 action has secured. Union men have the human limi- 
 tations of other men. Men and women, not of the 
 wage-earning class, who enjoy positions of greater 
 opportunity than the labor aristocracy, often add their 
 criticism of the latter for its refusal to risk its privi- 
 leges for the sake of the weaker brother. Under the 
 circumstances, their criticism sounds a little cheap to 
 the labor aristocracy. 
 
 When a group of workers has secured through its 
 union a position superior to other groups its sympathy 
 is generally expressed through financial donations. Its 
 refusal to go farther, to jeopardize its own position, 
 is not difficult to understand. Having fought for its 
 own position against fearful odds it becomes tenacious 
 of its gains. At best its position is precarious, and, 
 like other groups or individuals in precarious positions, 
 it doubts its ability to share its foothold. It knows the 
 difficulties of organization, and, if it is a union of 
 
 SYMPATHETIC STRIKE ACTION 117 
 
 skilled artizans, it has little confidence that unskilled 
 v/orkers can weather the storms of organization. 
 
 Against these class divisions within the whole group, 
 which stultify and pervert the idea of a labor democ- 
 racy, there are leveling forces which are breaking 
 down the lines of division. When a craft is reduced 
 either by machinery or shop management to a lower 
 level of skill or artizanship, the workers affected find 
 that their position in the trade union world is weak- 
 ened and their economic gains secured by organization 
 are in peril. These men, for the first time possibly, 
 realize the need of cooperation with other labor 
 groups ; they realize that labor unity must extend across 
 trade lines as well as within them ; that this unity, in- 
 deed, is as important as trade unity. Men reduced in 
 their position are the best possible recruits to the move- 
 ment for sympathetic action. It is a truism in labor 
 union circles that men fight harder against reductions 
 
 than for advance. 
 
 The metal workers at present are the most important 
 acquisition to the democratic movement. They have 
 by shop management and machinery been reduced in 
 large numbers from artizans to the ranks of the semi- 
 skilled. Their recent change in policy, described in 
 the preceding chapter, proposes to turn their losses 
 into gains for the whole labor account and to endow 
 that account with new strength and leadership. (See 
 Chapter VI.) 
 While the lack of sympathy between the casual 
 
ii8 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 n 
 
 It.' . 
 
 : 
 
 I ■ 
 
 
 11 • 
 
 ■• t 
 
 laborer and the well established trade unionist is a 
 constant reminder that the spirit of labor solidarity 
 is lacking when a sympathetic movement, like the 
 machinists, is started, or when a sympathetic strike 
 occurs (an insufferable conspiracy in the eyes of 
 employers), every union man is conscious, whether 
 his judgment sanctions the action or not, that the 
 act itself is the supreme expression of the union* 
 movement; that it is the final test of a worker's loyalty 
 to his fellow workers. 
 
 There is a common impression among the radical 
 labor people that the trade union men are wanting 
 or quite lost where questions depending on class action 
 arise. The Colorado miners* war against the attacks 
 of a corporation-owned state militia and their efforts 
 to break the miners' strike, brought out evidences of 
 deep and substantial sympathy which trade union men 
 were ready and eager to give. It was enough for 
 many old-line trade unionists to know that their 
 brothers of another union had taken up arms in self- 
 defense, for them to throw themselves into the fight. 
 Such conservative unions as the Cigar Makers, the 
 Typographical, and the Building Trades Council of 
 Denver, voted money to purchase arms and ammuni- 
 tion for the miners' war. The Machinists and the 
 Trades and Labor Assembly of Colorado recruited 
 regiments from their memberships. The president of 
 the State Federation of Labor transported arms from 
 one miners' camp to another. Members of the Rail- 
 
 SYMPATHETIC STRIKE ACTION 119 
 
 road Brotherhood refused to carry the militia into the 
 
 strike district. 
 
 The Colorado strike proved what all members of 
 unions know, that labor men with a strong sense 
 of their labor affiliations, whether they are conserva- 
 tive or radical in the every-day methods and aims of 
 organization, will answer the call for solidarity when a 
 ^rebellious union takes up arms against a state militia. 
 Throughout the country there were hundreds of union 
 men ready to fall in at the miners' call. They did not 
 question whether the miners would win or lose, 
 whether the strike was justified or judicious. Rash 
 they might be, but the miners were desperate and 
 fighting against entrenched interests and were risking 
 their lives and all they valued. It was a signal which 
 few labor union men failed to recognize and which 
 many were ready to answer if called. 
 
 Sympathetic action is something apart from the form 
 of organization. Industrial councils of trade unions 
 and industrial unions are recognitions of the need of 
 closer association and common action ; they are steps 
 toward sympathetic action but not substitutes for it. 
 The realization of sympathetic action among all 
 workers is dependent on spirit, experience and under- 
 standing as it grows out of experience. While the 
 form of an organization may be an expression of its 
 growth, it may perish under the one form as well 
 as the other. 
 
UNION RECOGNITION 
 
 121 
 
 i' » 
 
 ^ II 
 
 M 
 
 i 
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 
 UNION RECOGNITION AND THE UNION 
 
 SHOP 
 
 Consistent with the partnership theory— "The free American 
 workman " the anarchist in industry— The " scab " a grafter 
 —An A. F. of L. weapon— Position of different internationals 
 —Preferential shop. 
 
 A UNION shop, called outside of union circles a 
 " closed shop," that is, a shop where the owner has 
 agreed to employ only members of a union, and union 
 recognition, or the agreement by the employer to deal 
 with representatives of the union, instead of with 
 his employees individually as to this or that condition 
 of employment, are both demands that follow logically 
 the program of the American Federation of Labor. 
 
 These demands are inherent parts of the theory 
 of the partnership relation between capital and labor. 
 They are usually considered strategic measures, but 
 they are more than that. They are acknowledg- 
 ments of the principle of a partnership relation 
 between capital and labor, and they give all subsequent 
 acts their sanction. ^^ 
 
 To a disciple of the partnership theory, it is as 
 consistent to claim that a man enlisted in the service 
 of a state is " free " in his American citizenship to 
 
 I20 
 
 serve special interests, not sanctioned by the state, 
 as it is to claim that an individual worker or individ- 
 ual employer, enlisted in the service of industry, is 
 free either to accept conditions of employment, or to 
 impose them before they are agreed to by the industry 
 as a whole, or in the interests of all. A worker who 
 insists on his personal rights, irrespective of the rights 
 of others, to work for whom he pleases and on terms 
 which please him, is the anarchist of industry, as are 
 also those who praise and protect him in his assumed 
 right. On grounds, then, of ethical implication, and 
 in the interest of justice and industrial peace, the 
 ** free American workingman " and the non-union 
 employer become fit subjects for coercion. 
 
 The demand for a union shop is closely associated 
 with the attitude of unionists toward non-unionists. 
 The non-unionist, or scab, is a grafter to all union 
 men. He enjoys the rewards of improved conditions 
 which have resulted from sacrifices of labor unionists 
 without himself having shared or suffered in their 
 sacrifices. In other words, all labor unionists recog- 
 nize through their bitter experience that one of the 
 results of the partial organization of the trade or 
 industry, of a successful or partially successful strike, 
 is the victimization of the men and women who have 
 borne the brunt and burden of the strike; that the 
 reaping of whatever rewards or benefits result from 
 organized action are enjoyed by the strike-breaker 
 as well as by the striker. They are enjoyed by the 
 
wttamtB^a^-TTsnas-m 
 
 122 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 W 
 
 tt 
 
 man who fought against the award, and against the 
 men who made the struggle, who paid the price, and 
 who won the fight for all. 
 
 Approaching the question of the union shop from 
 
 opposite positions, the Railway Brotherhoods and 
 
 Industrial Workers of the World oppose the position 
 
 of the American Federation. The Brotherhoods in 
 
 theory stand with those who preach the rights of the 
 
 " free American workmen." As a matter of fact, the 
 
 insurance features of the Brotherhoods have brought 
 
 the bulk of railroad workers into membership, and 
 
 for membership purposes the union shop regulation 
 
 is unnecessary. But on other grounds the union shop 
 
 is not necessary to railroad organization. The 
 
 unform regulations of a railroad extend over whole 
 
 classes of workers. Men are not bargained with 
 
 individually. A fixed rate is decided on or other 
 
 conditions are arranged for, and a blanket order is 
 
 carried out without variation over a system. As has 
 
 been observed, the regulations and order of a railroad 
 
 and of a state are applied with the same mechanical 
 
 regularity to all the servants of each. 
 
 The Industrial Workers does not ask for union 
 recognition or the union shop, not because it believes 
 in the " free American workman," but because it 
 wants no recognition from employers whose rights 
 it refuses to recognize in the ownership or adminis- 
 tration of wealth and its production. 
 
 Practically all the unions of the Federation demand 
 
 y 
 
 I 
 
 \ 
 
 UNION RECOGNITION 123 
 
 union recognition, but this question, as well as the 
 question of the union shop, is settled by the individual 
 union. Unions of such strength as the Typographical 
 make union shop contracts, while the Iron Molders 
 make few closed shop agreements. As one of its 
 officers expresses it . . . " it is the duty of the union 
 alone to make unionists of the workers." 
 
 Some of the unions adopt an opportunistic attitude ; 
 that is, they graduate their demands. They include, 
 for instance, the union shop in their demands only 
 after the trade is well organized. It comes after 
 demands for the adjustment of conditions of employ- 
 ment, as it is, in the experience of unions, the most 
 difficult demand to secure. Other unions make the 
 union shop their first demand, on the ground that in 
 their weakness they need the assurance that members 
 will not be discharged on account of their member- 
 ship. If a shop strikes in rush season, a newly organ- 
 ized trade can frequently gain a union shop contract. 
 The fight to hold the gain comes later. They realize 
 this when they make the original demand, but they 
 claim that the securing of that demand advertises the 
 advantages and strength of organization among other 
 workers of the trade, that it gives the workers courage, 
 and is good propaganda tactics. This is the well- 
 known position taken by the young Jewish women 
 in sewing trades, in their first attempt at organization. 
 It was the wholesale discrimination against union 
 members, and the use of the blacklist by the employers, 
 
 J 
 
124 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 t 
 
 I 
 
 Vi 
 
 |T •> ! 
 
 f i 
 
 which led the Bridge and Structural Iron Workers to 
 make the union-shop contract the issue in the trade. 
 The strike of miners in the southern coal fields of 
 Colorado, called in September, 1913, and resulting 
 in a war between the miners and the operators of the 
 entire state before May of the following year, startled 
 the general public into an understanding of the differ- 
 ence between union recognition and the union shop 
 and disclosed, also, the reasons why opponents of 
 unions treat both as an abridgement of personal 
 freedom. 
 
 The strike followed the refusal of the mine op- 
 erators to grant the miners certain minima, one of 
 which was recognition of the union ; that is, that the 
 operators would consent to deal with representatives 
 of their men, who chose to delegate their dealings 
 with the coal companies to officers of the United Mine 
 Workers. The union made no demand on the mine 
 operators to employ union men, but there was a law 
 on the statute books of Colorado which prohibited 
 employers from discharging men because of their 
 membership in a union. This law, like all other laws 
 for the protection of Colorado miners, was deliber- 
 ately ignored. The operators knew that the observ- 
 ance of the law or the recognition of the union 
 would result automatically in the complete unioniza- 
 tion of the mines. They claimed that only ten per 
 cent of the men belonged to the union, leaving it, as 
 usual, to be inferred that the other ninety per cent. 
 
 UNION RECOGNITION 
 
 125 
 
 had freely chosen to stay outside the union. They 
 failed to explain that every man working in the 
 mines of the large corporations knew that if he 
 made union connections he did so at the risk of his 
 job. They did not explain how it happened that when 
 the strike was called ninety-five per cent, of the men 
 struck in spite of the protection which the state of 
 Colorado was ready to afford all men who helped to 
 break the strike. 
 
 The mine owners, it was apparent, had good ground 
 for insisting that union recognition and the union shop 
 were in Colorado virtually one and the same thing; 
 they knew that if the men were free they would seek 
 the protection of the union against the exploitation 
 of the company and the anarchy of state officials; 
 they knew that there was not a miner in Colorado 
 who would not prefer to work under the regulations 
 which the United Mine Workers had established in 
 other coal-producing states rather than under the 
 conditions imposed by the coal corporations of Colo- 
 rado. As the strike advanced it became rather difficult 
 for the operators to convince the public that miners 
 who were free would prefer to work ten hours 
 instead of eight ; that they would prefer to accept the 
 report of an operators* representative to one of their 
 own as to the amount of coal they mined per day; 
 that they chose to work ten per cent, below the scale 
 of wages fixed by the unon; that they welcomed 
 restrictions as to where they should or should not 
 
 •S 
 
m 
 
 -4. 
 
 ..<J-|: 
 
 
 126 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 make personal purchases ; that it was their pleasure to 
 erect timbers, and hew out unmarketable material for 
 the corporations without pay. A representative of 
 the corporations, testifying before a Congressional 
 Commission, assured that commission that the Colo- 
 rado Fuel & Iron Company wotdd spend millions 
 of dollars to protect the miners of Colorado and other 
 American workingmen in their freedom to follow 
 their preference for the conditions enumerated. For 
 reasons which did not seem strange, not one miner out 
 of the thousands of " loyal " and " faithful " servants 
 raised a voice of gratitude for the proposed protection. 
 
 Before the strike was over it was possible for 
 everyone in the United States to realize once and 
 forever that the operators of Colorado fought union 
 recognition because they knew that that would open 
 the door to the miners to choose freely, and they 
 knew what their choice would be. They also knew 
 that, where the miners had freed themselves from 
 the domination of the corporations, safety in mining 
 increased; that higher wages were paid; that hours of 
 work were shortened. 
 
 During the strike, Professor E. R. A. Seligman 
 asked why Colorado mining should be exempt from 
 the generally accepted practice of determining the 
 working conditions of miners through union confer- 
 ence with operators. He called attention to the de- 
 velopment of the practice of such conferences in other 
 states. He stated that during the sixties, the sev- 
 
 UNION RECOGNITION 
 
 127 
 
 enties, and the eighties there were local organizations 
 and local strikes in the bituminous coal fields of 
 Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania; that the 
 demands during that period were recognition of the 
 union, increase in wages, decrease in hours, abolition 
 of company stores, right of unions to supervise the 
 weighing of the coal mined. These demands, the 
 same as those the miners were making in Colorado 
 in 1914, were finally secured, and collective bargaining 
 was established. In 1894 a general business de- 
 pression interrupted contractural relations between 
 miners and operators, and in the first general strike 
 occurring at that time the miners lost ground. In the 
 second general strike, in 1897, interstate joint confer- 
 ences with the operators were secured, together with 
 the eight-hour day, an increase in wages, and a sys- 
 tem for settling disputes over interpretations of con- 
 tracts. In 1899-1900, in the coal fields of Missouri, 
 Kansas, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Texas, a strike re- 
 sulted in the recognition of the union, the establish- 
 ment of a scale of wages, the inauguration of another 
 interstate joint conference. Between 1899-1914 sys- 
 tems of joint agreements extended to Kentucky, Ten- 
 nessee, West Vi!-ginia, Michigan, Iowa, Wyoming, 
 Montana, Washington, and British Columbia. It is 
 against a union with such a regard for establishing 
 collective bargaining that the coal operators of Colo- 
 rado have waged their war and for the extinction of 
 the union have defied the laws of the state. 
 
128 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 \^ 11 
 
 Til 
 
 The strike of the cloak makers in New York in 1910 
 resulted in popularizing a modification of the idea of 
 the union shop. As a compromise proposition an 
 agreement based on a preferential shop was adopted. 
 In a preferential shop an employer agrees to give 
 preference to union members. As a matter of fact, 
 the preferential shop is the union shop where a union 
 is strong and it is an open shop where the union 
 is weak. 
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 THE UNION LABEL 
 
 Purpose of the A. F. of L. label— Ground of employers* accept- 
 ance—Claims for the label as a method of organization— 
 As used by the Boot and Shoe Workers' Union— Why it is 
 successful in some trades and not in others— Not a business 
 proposition, but a moral obligation— Inter-union label diflS- 
 culties— Ethical and educational proposition. 
 
 The use of a label as a union emblem is advocated 
 by both the American Federation and the Industrial 
 Workers. It has not been developed by the latter 
 organization, but it has been put to the test as a 
 method of organization by the Federation. 
 
 Its purpose in the hands of the Federation is to 
 give an opportunity to every man and woman as a 
 consumer to uphold the organizations of the Federa- 
 tion by demanding union-label goods. 
 
 The label is a guarantee to the interested consumer 
 that the goods he purchases are made under union 
 conditions, mutually agreed to by the employer and 
 the union. In exchange for these concessions to 
 the workers, the union promises the employer to 
 encourage the patronage of union members and 
 friends. 
 
 The label agreement may follow or precede the 
 organization of workers in a shop. That is, an em- 
 
 139 
 
130 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ployer may find himself with his shop full of union 
 workers and not in a position to get non-union mem- 
 bers. Under such circumstances he may then con- 
 sider that he cannot afford to refuse the workers the 
 conditions demanded by the union, and he may accept 
 the use of the proffered label if it seems to him an 
 advantage to do so. Or, where there is an organ- 
 ization, a union official may be successful in convincing 
 an employer that the use of the label will increase 
 his trade. In such cases an employer will notify his 
 workers that in the future he will employ only union 
 members, and if any wish to work for him, they must 
 join the union whose label he desires. In the first 
 instance, the workers created their own organization. 
 In the second instance, organization came from 
 without. 
 
 Workers who have become union members through 
 their employers' agreement to employ only union 
 men rather than through their own initiative, may 
 become strong unionists provided their union gives 
 them infuture full opportunity to take part in the 
 collective bargaining which fixes their conditions of 
 employment. 
 
 The advocates of the label method declare its su- 
 periority on the ground that when the representatives 
 of the trade union seek an alliance with an employer 
 without first approaching the workers and subjecting 
 them to the risks of labor union agitation and union 
 membership, the hardships of strikes and the blacklist 
 
 THE UNION LABEL 
 
 131 
 
 are avoided, as well as the development of class 
 feeling. 
 
 It is the tendency of some " label unions "of the 
 Federation to push the pure and simple label method 
 until it supersedes all other methods. The label 
 method of organization has taken precedence over 
 other methods in the Cigar Makers' Union, the Boot 
 and Shoe Workers' Union and the Overall Workers' 
 locals of the United Garment Workers. 
 
 Certain boot and shoe manufacturers have adopted 
 the label proposition with such enthusiasm and con- 
 viction of self-interest that they employ members of 
 the Boot and Shoe Workers' Union in the capacity 
 of agents to advertise their special brand of label 
 goods. It is usually understood in union label agree- 
 ments that the union will carry the advertising end of 
 the contract. But these label agents are sent by the 
 manufacturer throughout the country to preach the 
 label method to union men, and to advertise, inci- 
 dentally, the goods of the manufacturers who employ 
 them. These joint emissaries of the manufacturers 
 and the union are exhorted to approach capital in the 
 spirit of friendship. With the Boot and Shoe Work- 
 ers, the label contract is the emblem of peace. 
 
 One of the officers of an international union de- 
 clares that they found the label method of organiza- 
 tion barren of results in their particular line of pro- 
 duction. He claims that the label cannot be success- 
 fully operated where its demand depends upon pur- 
 
132 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 chasers accustomed to a wide choice in a particular 
 line of merchandise. To illustrate, women are in- 
 spired to purchase clothes quite as much on account 
 of the wide choice in style, color, or quality, as in 
 answer to the social requirement that they cover their 
 bodies or their own need of warmth. The officer of 
 the union laid down the general proposition that 
 where habits of purchase have developed a large 
 market for choice, the chance of the label method of 
 organization is weakened, if not lost. His position 
 is backed up by the experience of certain other unions. 
 In men's clothing the label has succeeded on overalls 
 better than on coats, on electricians' gloves and not 
 on ordinary gloves. It has succeeded on men's hats 
 and not on women's. It has succeeded in printing 
 where the bulk of orders is not dependent on the 
 variety or style of type a firm has to offer. 
 
 But such a test as to the practical aspect of the 
 label would not be accepted by the label advocates. 
 It would not be considered a good and sufficient reason 
 for rejecting the label method. No reasons could be 
 successfully urged. All arguments or business con- 
 siderations are turned down with the answer : " It 
 is the duty of all union men and women to purchase 
 goods bearing the label and to forego their own 
 individual preference." 
 
 The label, for many label advocates, is as significant 
 as a card of union membership, and the man or 
 woman who purchases a non-union label article when 
 
 THE UNION LABEL 
 
 ^33 
 
 he could purchase an article bearing the label is a 
 near relative to a scab. 
 
 Some of the difficulties in the way of a universal 
 adoption of this attitude within union circles is well 
 illustrated by the position taken by the Musicians' 
 Union. The musicians insist that the trade unions, 
 as paitrons of instrumental music, shall employ union 
 musicians only, but that musicians as patrons of 
 musical instruments shall be left free to purchase the 
 instruments which are sound in tone rather than in 
 trade union production. The musician's first object 
 is to secure his place in his profession; his place in 
 the labor movement comes later. The metal 
 polishers retort : " On what grounds does the union 
 musician demand the patronage of labor unions? 
 A trade union that employs a union musician using a 
 non-union label instrument is virtually employing a 
 non-union metal polisher, thus violating trade union 
 rules." 
 
 The label method encounters many practical diffi- 
 culties as organization is extended into different trades. 
 Is a trade union man observing trade union regula- 
 tions when he uses in his work tools or raw products 
 of a firm refusing to employ trade unionists? The 
 difficulties still further develop. Is a trade union man 
 observing trade union regulations when he purchases 
 an article bearing the label, but parts of the 
 article were manufactured by non-union houses? Is 
 a man, for instance, observing label regulations when 
 
V 
 
 
 134 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 he purchases a union label shoe with a silk trade 
 label bearing the name of the shoe, if this label was 
 made in a non-union silk factory? 
 
 It is usual in meetings of trade union delegates to 
 hear the ethical rather than the business side of the 
 label proposition. A union man knows that he cannot 
 put forth, at least, not in a union meeting, the excuse 
 for smoking non-union cigars or cigars without the 
 label, that he does not like the label brands of cigars. 
 He cannot excuse his non-union label shoes on the 
 ground that his feet are sensitive and that the union 
 shoes cripple him. Nor is he free to choose, ac- 
 cording to union ethics, the bread he eats. If he does 
 any of these things, the cold shoulder of his union 
 label brother is turned toward him, and he is re- 
 minded in unvarnished ways that he can eat the bread 
 he prefers and enjoy his special brand of tobacco and ^ 
 wear the shoes which give him comfort, when he 
 and his fellow unionists, through strenuous adver- 
 tising and purchasing of the undesirable label pro- 
 duct, prove to the manufacturer of the goods he pre- 
 fers that it is to his advantage to adopt the label and 
 settle with the union. 
 
 And finally it is claimed that agitation for the 
 purchase of union label goods educates the public in 
 the beneficence of labor and capital co-partnership. 
 It is hoped to reform the public as well as the members 
 of labor organizations in their capacity as consumers; 
 to transform them from irresponsible to altruistic 
 
 THE UNION LABEL 
 
 135 
 
 purchasers. With the realization of this hope, the 
 interests of workers and of employers themselves will 
 have become one, and peace instead of war will 
 characterize the labor movement. 
 
 /, 
 

 r 
 
 A'. 
 
 !? 
 
 J I 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 THE BOYCOTT 
 
 Use of boycott and blacklist— An A. F. of L. weapon— Buck 
 Stove and Range boycott — United Hatters— Legal opinions, 
 decisions — A. F. of L. action — Legal status in states. 
 
 As employers use a blacklist to rid an industry of 
 workers who stand for the organization of labor, so 
 does labor use a boycott to rid an industry of em- 
 ployers who are antagonistic to it. Both are war 
 measures and retaliatory. The difference is in the 
 use of the weapons. Employers use the blacklist 
 secretly and never admit they use it. Workers use 
 the boycott openly and through it make a public appeal 
 for cooperation in a just cause. 
 
 The boycott is an American Federation of Labor 
 weapon. It is not used by the other labor organiza- 
 tions. The Federation acts upon the assumption that 
 its cause is a just cause, representing in the last 
 analysis the interests of society. It expects, therefore, 
 the support of society. It bases its claim for this 
 support on the proposition that the interests of labor 
 and capital are identical. It is only after the unions 
 have appealed in vain to an employer to rec- 
 ognize the natural alliance existing between them, 
 
 that they turn to the public and demand that it with- 
 
 136 
 
 THE BOYCOTT 
 
 ^37 
 
 draw its support from an employer who refuses, first, 
 either to recognize labor in its organized capacity, 
 or in the capacity in which it can function as a partner; 
 and second, to allow labor its rightful share in 
 partnership. 
 
 The boycott naturally finds the strongest response 
 within the ranks of organized labor. The great 
 part of the general public either directly sides 
 with the employer and denounces those who victimize 
 him, or indirectly supports the employer by holding 
 aloof. 
 
 The power of the boycott can be judged by the 
 energy which capital has dedicated to its defeat. 
 
 The National Association of Manufacturers stood 
 back of the Buck Stove and Range Company in its 
 determination to kill the operation of the boycott, not 
 only against that company, but in all industries and 
 whenever found in operation within the United States. 
 It was the intention of the Association to test the 
 case of the Buck Stove and Range Company by 
 carrying it to the United States Supreme Court, and 
 there having the boycott declared once and for all 
 illegal throughout the country. The case became side- 
 tracked in a contempt of court proceeding and was 
 withdrawn as a boycott case on the settlement of the 
 dispute between the Buck Stove and Range Company 
 and the union. 
 
 Justice Van Orsdel, in speaking of the boycott, 
 says in his decision modifying the Buck Stove and 
 
138 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 . Range Company's injunction against the officers of 
 the American Federation of Labor: 
 
 Again, we do not assume that it will be contended that 
 a citizen has not perfect freedom to deal with whom he 
 pleases and withhold his patronage for any reason that 
 he may deem proper, whether the reason be one origi- 
 nating in his own conscience, or through the advice of 
 a neighbor, or through the reading of an article in a 
 paper. Neither would it be unlawful for such citizen to 
 advise another not to deal with a person with, whom 
 he has concluded not to continue his patronage. If this 
 advice may extend to one, it may to a hundred ; and the 
 thing done will not be actionable so long as it is an 
 expression of honest opinion and not slanderous, how- 
 ever much the intercourse between this citizen and his 
 neighbor may operate to injure the person against whom 
 the advice is directed. As long as confined to a mere 
 expression of opinion as to the fairness or unfairness 
 of a business transaction, it is not actionable. ^ 
 
 The Boycott Committee of the Federation at the 
 annual convention of 1909 opened its report by 
 quoting the opinion of the Federation's president, 
 Samuel Gompers : 
 
 It will be remembered that the injunction was sought 
 primarily to restrain the people in their right to quit buy- 
 ing Buck's stoves and ranges. It over-reached itself so 
 far that the right to freedom of speech and press be- 
 came involved. However, no consideration of the in- 
 junction has been possible by the courts without taking 
 up the principle involved in the boycott. We have al- 
 ways held, and we still hold, that the workers or any 
 of the people have the right to withhold or to bestow 
 
 THE BOYCOTT 
 
 139 
 
 t^ 
 
 I 
 
 ! 
 
 their patronage as they choose, that they have the right 
 to advise their friends and sympathizers of this action 
 and of the reasons therefor. It is hardly necessary to 
 state that in the case of the workers the unfair attitude 
 of the dealer in question has always been the reason 
 for withdrawal of patronage. It has been made clear that 
 he refused to pay the standard rate of wages, and to 
 agree to other equitable conditions which the workers 
 seek through their organizations, and hence the with- 
 drawal of patronage. The boycotts declared by other 
 citizens have sometimes been placed for other reasons, 
 and they can safely be left to a defense of their own 
 actions. I only wish to point out in passing, that the 
 boycott is by no means a weapon used by the workers 
 alone. It is one of those inalienable rights which are at 
 times used by all people. The right to withhold or be- 
 stow patronage is one of those things which can neither 
 be enjoined, forbidden, nor punished. 
 
 The report of the Boycott Committee continued : 
 
 The wares of the labor-boycotted enterprise, to the 
 eye, are made up of the products of nature, fashioned by 
 the hands of more or less skilled workers; but to the 
 individual with the capacity for analysis there is visible 
 the blood and innocence of the child, the health and 
 virtue of the woman and the disputed and denied right 
 of the toiler to collectively bargain for the sale of labor. 
 It impresses your committee that the opposition to the 
 boycott, when it takes its legal form, is really intended to 
 cover the economic iniquities of affected capital ; to with- 
 draw the attention of the public from the labor exploita- 
 tion, and center it on the ethics of the boycott, as wrong- 
 fully expounded, to becloud and befog the real issue so 
 that the unfair producer, the enemy of his own class as 
 well as of the wage-earner, may be free to continue his 
 

 I40 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 industrial piracy while the consumer is sent chasing false 
 gods and exploded economic theories. The protection of 
 the law is sought by skilful pleaders for special privileges 
 in order that the rottenness, the tyranny and the horrible 
 working conditions associated with the boycotted manu- 
 facturing plant, may be obscured to the public gaze. 
 If in instances where the boycott is now necessary, the 
 right kind of publicity could be had, the boycott would 
 be unnecessary, for an aroused public conscience would 
 speedily compel the manufacturing and the selling male- 
 factor to put his establishment in industrial order or to 
 go out of business. ... If an individual has the right 
 to enlist the sympathies of his fellow men, and it follows 
 that if the two have the right to refuse to patronize, 
 then labor in combination has the right to refuse to 
 patronize. We say that when your cause is just and 
 every other remedy has been employed without result, 
 boycott. We say that when the employer has deter- 
 mined to exploit not only adult male labor, but our 
 women and our children; and our reasoning and our 
 appeal to his fairness and his conscience will not sway 
 him, boycott. We say that when labor has been op- 
 pressed, browbeaten and tyrannized, boycott. We say 
 when social and political conditions have become so bad 
 that ordinary remedial measures are fruitless, boycott. 
 And finally we say that we have the right to boycott and 
 we propose to exercise that right.* 
 
 Another case as famous as the Buck Stove and 
 Range Company is the case of the Danbury hatters, 
 or Loewe v. Lawlor. The prosecution invoked the 
 Sherman Anti-Trust law to aid in establishing the 
 boycott as a national conspiracy in restraint of inter- 
 state commerce. Judgment was finally entered 
 against the defendants in November, 1912, amounting 
 
 THE BOYCOTT 
 
 141 
 
 to $240,000. The attorney for the Executive Council 
 of the Federation appealed from this decision, and 
 under the instruction of the National Convention will 
 carry the case through the highest courts. The at- 
 torney retained by the Federation of Labor in the 
 hatters' case, in addressing the convention of the 
 Federation held in Rochester in 19 12, brought out the 
 significance to organized labor of treating labor-union 
 activity as conspiracy in restraint of trade. This 
 phase of the problem is more important than are 
 decisions against the boycott alone, as all labor-union 
 action is conspiracy if conspiracy is to cover all 
 collective action of labor which interferes with an 
 employer's interstate trade, for there are few manu- 
 facturers whose sale of goods does not cross state 
 lines. If the reasoning of the plaintiffs in the case 
 against the hatters is eventually sustained, practically 
 every union activity could be declared illegal as a 
 conspiracy in restraint of trade. The attorney in 
 addressing the convention said : 
 
 You possibly know that over in Danbury, Connecti- 
 cut, there has been a firm known as D. E. Loewe and 
 Company, engaged in the manufacture of hats. Along 
 in the fall and winter of 1901, and during the spring of 
 1902, an effort was made to unionize the factory of D. E. 
 Loewe and Company. Various conferences were held 
 with committees and an eflfort was made to reach an 
 amicable adjustment. Failing in this effort, on the 25th 
 day of July, 1902, the union men employed in that fac- 
 tory quit work. The next day the non-union men em- 
 
142 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ployed in that factory quit work, so that by the night 
 of the 26th of July, 1902, that factory was cleaned out 
 and only six or seven men remained. The matter ran 
 along until August. Then the agents of the United 
 Hatters on the road began to effectively advertise the 
 union label. They called upon the trade wherever the 
 hats of D. E. Loewe and Company were sold and asked 
 the dealers to transfer their patronage to firms using the 
 union label. This condition continued until the summer 
 of 1903, and then Mr. Daniel Davenport, the attorney 
 of the American Anti-Boycott Association, began two 
 pieces of litigation. First he filed in the courts of Con- 
 necticut an action against the officers of the American 
 Federation of Labor and a number of individuals of the 
 United Hatters' organization. At the same time he filed 
 in the Federal Court at Hartford an action brought un- 
 der the provisions of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, nam- 
 ing as defendants some 255 members of the Hatters' 
 Union and drawing his complaint so broad as to include 
 each and every one of the then 1,400,000 members of 
 the organized labor movement of this country. ... in 
 that complaint you are charged with being parties to a 
 conspiracy carried on contrary to the provisions of the 
 Sherman Anti-Trust Act. . . . 
 
 The complaint charged, and had to charge in order 
 to give the Federal Court jurisdiction, that for years 
 there had been a conspiracy among the members of the 
 United Hatters of North America and members of the 
 American Federation of Labor, the purpose of which 
 conspiracy was to destroy interstate commerce, to de- 
 stroy the interstate commerce of any employer who 
 failed to agree with the labor movement of this country 
 in the policies it was at that time advocating. I take it 
 that most of you understand that if you live in New 
 York and I live in New York and you want to bring 
 an action of law against me you must bring that action 
 
 THE BOYCOTT 
 
 143 
 
 
 •^1 
 
 in the State of New York. The defendants resided in 
 Connecticut and the complainants resided in Connecticut. 
 The great damage sustained by Mr. Loewe was not 
 because of boycotting proceedings but the damage he 
 suffered by reason of the loss of his employees. Under 
 ordinary circumstances that loss, if recoverable, would 
 be in the state courts of Connecticut. In order to bring 
 that element of damages within the purview of the 
 Sherman Anti-Trust law, Mr. Davenport had to allege 
 that the strike, the calling out of the men, was a part 
 of the carrying out of the conspiracy to destroy Mr. 
 Loewe's interstate commerce. So you want to under- 
 stand that everything done in connection with that strike 
 is alleged to have been done for the sole and only pur- 
 pose of destroying interstate commerce. 
 
 Now you have a strike in California where they are 
 engaged in the manufacturing of products that are manu- 
 factured to be shipped into Nevada. What is the result ? 
 You haven't a right to withdraw your labor from that 
 employer, because if you do you are preventing the 
 manufacture of goods which, if manufactured, will be- 
 come a part of the interstate commerce of this country. 
 So I say this is important because there is a next step. 
 It has been declared that hatters scattered throughout 
 the jurisdiction of our Federal government may not 
 collectively refuse to buy non-union hats, may not col- 
 lectively ask their friends not to buy non-union hats, 
 may not ask their friends collectively to not buy the hats 
 of Loewe and Company, because if Mr. Loewe was find- 
 ing a market for his hats in California or Michigan the 
 hats when shipped would be a part of the interstate com- 
 merce of this country. So I say the next step is to pre- 
 vent men collectively to withdraw their services because 
 they are withdrawing their services from the employ- 
 ment of the men engaged in the manufacture of a prod- 
 uct that will become part of the interstate commerce 
 of this country. . . . 
 
144 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 f 
 
 I' i 
 
 m 
 
 J 
 
 K 
 
 Now, what does it mean to my organization or to 
 your organization? It means that if any officers or 
 group of agents of your international do anything that 
 brings it within the scope of the Sherman Anti-Trust law 
 your property can be taken away, your wages garnisheed, 
 your bank account attached. It is the most important 
 question you have before you for consideration, because it 
 is an attempt, as this report says, to say to organized 
 labor, " You cannot afford to affiliate with your union, 
 because if you do you become individually responsible 
 to answer in damages for what that union or the mem- 
 bers, officers, or agents of that union may do.'* 
 
 It is a great question. It is the first time in the 
 history of jurisprudence in this country that a man 
 could be made a party to a conspiracy without his 
 knowledge, that a man could be charged as being a 
 party to carrying on a conspiracy against the law with- 
 out his knowing he was participating in such a con- 
 spiracy. » 
 
 While the appeal of this case is being taken, the 
 Federation decided to work as usual for the amend- 
 ment of the Federal law so that trade unions would 
 not be classed with trusts as combinations in restraint 
 of trade.* The law was not so amended in the 1913 
 session of Congress, but no provision was made in * 
 the supplementary appropriation bill for the prose- 
 cution of labor unions under the act.t The President 
 of the United States in signing the appropriation 
 act stated that this exemption would not protect the 
 
 * See Chapter XII, pp. 148-149. 
 
 t In September, 1914, Congress enacted a law exempting the 
 
 unions. (See text of section of new law at end of chanter 
 p. 147.) *^ ' 
 
 THE BOYCOTT 
 
 145 
 
 unions from prosecution under the Sherman Law, as 
 other funds were available for the purpose. 
 
 In most of the states the boycott is declared a 
 conspiracy. Missouri and California have upheld the 
 important decision handed down in Montana, that 
 labor has a right to combine for the purpose of per- 
 suading others to refrain from doing what it decides 
 is to its advantage not to do. 
 
 Some time in 1907, Lindsay and Company, whole- 
 sale fruit dealers, had been declared unfair by the 
 Miners' Union and Trades Assembly of Helena, Mon- 
 tana. This action had been endorsed by the Montana 
 Federation of Labor. Circulars announcing the fact 
 were sent out to the labor organizations of the State. 
 The Yellowstone Trade and Labor Assembly referred 
 the matter to its grievance committee, which issued 
 a circular calling on organized labor and all in sym- 
 pathy with it not to patronize Lindsay and Company. 
 As a result the firm's business was destroyed in Bill- 
 ings, Montana. 
 
 A sweeping injunction was issued and made perma- 
 nent against the Montana Federation of Labor, and 
 the Yellowstone Trade and Labor Assembly for boy- 
 cotting. From an order refusing to dissolve the in- 
 junction an appeal was taken. The Montana Su- 
 preme Court reversed the decision of the lower court 
 and dissolved the injunction. The opinion declares 
 the boycott to be legal. Justice Halloway, writing the 
 opinion, says : 
 
 4^ 
 
146 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 But what is there unlawful in the act of the union 
 workingmen of Billings in withdrawing their patronage 
 from the plaintiff? Certainly it cannot be said that 
 Lindsay and Company had a property right in the trade 
 of any particular person. In this country patronage de- 
 pends upon good will, and we do not think that it will be 
 contended by any one that it was wrongful or unlawful, 
 or violated any right of the plaintiff company, for any 
 particular individual in Billings to withdraw his patron- 
 age from Lindsay and Company, or from any other con- 
 cern which might be doing business with that company, 
 and that, too, without regard to his reason for doing so. 
 But there can be found running through our legal litera- 
 ture many remarkable statements that an act perfectly 
 lawful when done by one person becomes by some sort 
 of legerdemain criminal when done by two or more 
 persons acting in concert, and this upon the theory that 
 the concerted action amounts to a conspiracy. But with 
 this doctrine we do not agree. If an individual is clothed 
 with a right when acting alone, he does not lose such 
 right merely by acting with others, each of whom is 
 clothed with the same right. If the act done is lawful, 
 the combination of several persons to commit it does not 
 render it unlawful. In other words, the mere combina- 
 tion of action is not an element which gives character 
 to the act. It is the illegality of the purpose to be ac- 
 complished, or the illegal means used in furtherance of 
 the purpose, which makes the act illegal. (Ency. Law, 
 (2nd Ed.) Bohn Mfg. Co. v. Mollis, 54 Minn. 223, 55 N. 
 W. 119.) "A conspiracy is a combination of two or 
 more persons by some concerted action to accomplish a 
 criminal or unlawful purpose or to accomplish a pur- 
 pose, not in itself criminal or unlawful, by criminal or 
 unlawful means. . . ." We hold, then, that a labor or- 
 ganization may employ the boycott as herein defined in 
 furtherance of the object of its existence.* 
 
 THE BOYCOTT 
 
 147 
 
 This doctrine has been upheld by the courts of 
 Missouri and California and at one time in New 
 York. With these exceptions the boycott is declared 
 a conspiracy in other states. While the courts distin- 
 guish between primary and secondary boycotts the 
 unions recognize no difference between concerted vol- 
 untary acts of men within one group and the con- 
 certed acts of men of several groups. 
 
 Note. — (See p. 144.) The section of the federal statute ex- 
 empting unions is as follows: 
 
 " The labor of a human being is not a commodity or article 
 of commerce, and nothing contained in the anti-trust laws 
 shall be construed to forbid the existence and operation of 
 labor, agricultural, or horticultural organizations, instituted for 
 the purposes of mutual help and not having capital stock or 
 conducted for profit, or to forbid or restrain individual mem- 
 bers of such organization from lawfully carrying out the 
 legitimate objects thereof; nor shall such organization, or the 
 members thereof, be held or construed to be illegal combina- 
 tions or conspiracies in restraint of trade, under the anti-trust 
 laws." 
 
ARBITRATION 
 
 149 
 
 t 'I 
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 ARBITRATION 
 
 Voluntary and compulsory— Opposing position of labor and capi- 
 tal— Erdman Act— Engineers' arbitration board, its recom- 
 mendation of wage board, minority opinion— Amendment of 
 Erdman Act — Canadian Disputes Act— Compulsory arbitra- 
 tration in Australia and New Zealand— Right to strike. 
 
 The opposing positions of labor and capital on the 
 question of arbitration is but another illustration of 
 differences in objective points. 
 
 The trade unions have universally welcomed propo- 
 sitions for voluntary arbitration when a strike is on 
 or declared, and capital has opposed it with an answer, 
 which became classic some time back, " There is 
 nothing to arbitrate." 
 
 Capital has welcomed compulsory arbitration under 
 certain conditions, which labor in the United States 
 has universally opposed. 
 
 The employer who declares there is nothing to 
 arbitrate is the same employer who dismisses also 
 the claim of organized labor to a voice in fixing con- 
 ditions of work with the curt reply, " I can run my 
 business to suit myself." 
 
 The trade unions welcome voluntary arbitration 
 
 because, first, it secures a hearing for demands; 
 
 148 
 
 second, it forces the employer, in the presence of a 
 third party, to assume a more judicial attitude; it 
 forces him to explain his position, to discuss terms of 
 employment, and his right to sole management of 
 his business is opened to question. 
 
 Voluntary arbitration may or may not carry with 
 it compulsion to abide by an award. It may be that 
 workers or employers agree to submit a question to 
 arbitration, and to refer the award back to the workers 
 for acceptance or rejection. This is the usual form 
 of arbitration approved by the unions of the American 
 Federation. Or voluntary arbitration may mean that 
 workers and employers voluntarily submit questions 
 in dispute to arbitration, and agree, in advance, to be 
 bound by the decision of the arbitrators. The four 
 railroad brotherhoods advocate the latter method, and 
 have adopted it as their exclusive method of adjusting 
 wage scales and working conditions. 
 
 The Erdman Act, which reflected the attitude of 
 the railroad brotherhoods on the question of arbitra- 
 tion, provided that either the railroad managers or 
 the unions of the employees may invoke an arbitration 
 proceeding. But recourse to the act was optional; 
 that is, managers were free to lock out the workers, 
 or the workers were free to strike without resorting 
 to arbitration. If the parties in a controversy re- 
 quested arbitration under the Act, they are legally 
 bound to abide by the decisions of the arbitration 
 board. 
 
ISO 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ARBITRATION 
 
 t- 
 u 
 
 iA 
 
 fm 
 
 From 1907 to 1912, sixty cases of wage contro- 
 versies between railroad managers and railroad em- 
 ployees were settled under the terms of the Act. But 
 when the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers in 
 1912 made an appeal to the Boards of Directors ot 
 fifty-two Eastern railroads for increase and standard- 
 ization of wage rates over all the roads, the managers 
 representing the different boards separately refused 
 the demands, and refused, also, to submit to arbitra- 
 tion under the federal law. They claimed that the 
 three arbitrators, provided by the Erdman Act, were 
 not sufficient to settle so important a question. They 
 proposed as an alternative an arbitration board made 
 up of one representative to each of the parties of the 
 controversy, and five others to be appointed by the 
 Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, 
 who would represent public interest. The Engineers 
 resisted the proposition for a time in the fear that 
 the majority on a Board so appointed would fail 
 inevitably to appreciate the position of the workers. 
 Their fears were fully justified. The Engineers were 
 not granted the standardization or any increase in 
 wages. Instead, they were granted a minimum rate. 
 The important outcome of the arbitration was the 
 nature of the majority recommendation made by the 
 managers' representative and the five men who repre- 
 sented the public. It supplemented the beggarly 
 award with the recommendation in the interest of the 
 public that the majority were appointed to represent. 
 
 151 
 
 t 
 
 It discarded the idea that engineers were free men, 
 and proposed that they should in the future be treated 
 as servants of the public, surrendering personal de- 
 sires and points of view regarding their own condi- 
 tions of work to the desires and interests of the public. 
 The Board recommended a compulsory settlement of 
 wages by wage boards, and, with the creation of 
 such boards, that the men engaged in railroad service 
 be denied the right to strike. 
 
 It was not surprising that the five men who con- 
 trolled the Board, together with the managers of the 
 railroads, would regard the possibility of a railroad 
 strike as an incomparable calamity, and would fail 
 to realize that the compulsory terms of service they 
 proposed would not be endured by men enjoying even 
 a pretense of freedom. 
 
 In connection with its recommendations for the 
 establishment of wage boards in place of free and 
 collective bargaining, the Board observed: 
 
 If, notwithstanding the existence of a wage commis- 
 sion, the men engaged in train service struck, the ques- 
 tion would arise regarding the legal authority of the 
 government to compel employees to remain at work. Is 
 it unreasonable to ask that men in the service of public 
 utilities shall partially surrender their liberty in the matter 
 of quitting employment so that the nation as a whole may 
 not suffer disproportionately? ... It is the belief of 
 the Board that, in the last analysis, the only solution, 
 unless we are to rely solely upon the restraining power 
 of public opinion, is to qualify the principle of free 
 contract in the railroad service. A strike in the army 
 
152 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 1 
 
 ARBITRATION 
 
 153 
 
 »£_■<■, 
 
 :!*- 
 
 
 or navy is mutiny, and universally punished as such. 
 The same principle is applied to seamen because of the 
 public necessity involved. A strike among postal clerks, 
 as among the teachers of our public schools, would be 
 unthinkable. . . .^ 
 
 The attitude back of the recommendations of the 
 Board is typical of arbitration boards created in the 
 interests of the public. It keeps before it a sense of 
 the service to be rendered, and loses sight of the 
 fact that service depends on the willingness of human 
 beings to render it. If there had been a possibility 
 that any of the five men who represented the public 
 on the Board would in the course of time become 
 railroad employees themselves, it is doubtful if the 
 minority report would have been signed only by the 
 one man who represented the workers. The reply of 
 the workers* representative in his minority report 
 was: 
 
 When it is contemplated that such wage commissions 
 would have all the powers of a Court in determining a 
 labor controversy, at least equal power with the Inter- 
 state Commerce Commission in the determination of 
 transportation rates, with which it is here compared, we 
 strike at a vital and fundamental principle affecting the 
 legal and economic rights of railway employees. No 
 fault can be found with the public's interest in keeping 
 open the arteries of commerce; indeed, the railway is 
 an essential part of our modern civilization. It is dedi- 
 cated to the public use, and the laws regulating it in the 
 public interest are now an established policy. But with 
 all this railways are privately owned, and the relation 
 
 I 
 
 of the railway employee to his employer is private and 
 not public. Whatever relation the railway employee 
 may have to the public is secondary and through his 
 employer. . . . 
 
 The fact that the railway employee is engaged 
 in an employment affected with public use confers 
 upon him no benefits or advantages compared with em- 
 ployees engaged in the private industries; on the con- 
 trary, he suffers the disadvantages on account of the 
 character of the service he performs with its hazards, 
 great responsibilities, and many other exactions, such as 
 age limits, physical examination, severity of discipline, 
 and so on. 
 
 These conditions make necessary the organization 
 of railway employees for their own protection and ad- 
 vancement just as if they were engaged in any other 
 industry. To take away from them their present indus- 
 trial defenses because of their relation to the public 
 service, simply with the promise that they would be 
 treated fairly by a wage commission or other tribunal, 
 created for the purpose, is wholly inadvisable. . . . 
 There can be no comparison between the fixing of a rate 
 by a commission with a view of determining a fair 
 measure of justice between a railway and the public 
 and the fixing of a wage rate between the railway and 
 its employees. . . . ^ 
 
 In making the recommendation for compulsory 
 terms of service, the arbitration board cited as a pre- 
 cedent the regulation surrounding the service of sea- 
 men. At the 19 1 3 convention of the Locomotive 
 Firemen, the president of the Seamen's Union said: 
 " We have, since 1904, been earnestly and persistently 
 engaged in wiping off the statute books the last re- 
 
154 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 maining involuntary servitude under the flag of Uncle 
 Sam. Once take it off our backs, and it will never 
 be placed upon anybody else's back in this coun- 
 try." » 
 
 The demands of the other Railway Brotherhoods 
 which followed in the succeeding months for new 
 wage agreements were met by the managers with the 
 answer that they would not arbitrate as formerly 
 under the Erdman Act, but would refer the demands 
 to a Board similar in personnel to the Board which 
 had decided the case of the Engineers. 
 
 The other Brotherhoods, profiting by the fate of 
 the Engineers, refused. But they consented to the 
 Newlands amendment of the Erdman Act, in July, 
 19 1 3, which provides for a possible increase in the 
 number of arbitrators ; that is, two railroad managers 
 in place of one, two union representatives in place 
 of one, and two representing the public. With two 
 men instead of one representing the public, the 
 chances of subserving the public interest are more 
 than doubled., With two, there is opportunity for 
 concerted action in pushing the claims of a great 
 public against the interests of a group of workers. 
 This is especially true in railroad service. Concession 
 to the demands of railroad workers for decent con- 
 ditions would involve the roads in a colossal expen- 
 diture inconsistent with all precedent for railroad 
 financing. The chances, therefore, of the managers 
 for a settlement favorable to them are increased with 
 
 •ft 
 
 ( 
 
 i^ 
 
 ARBITRATION 
 
 155 
 
 the increased representation of the public on arbitra- 
 tion boards. 
 
 The Newlands Amendment creates a Commissioner 
 of Mediation who is the chairman of a newly created 
 Board of Mediation. The chairman and two federal 
 officials, appointed by the President of the United 
 States, make up the Board. The Board may act on 
 its own volition. If it fails to bring the contending 
 factions to an agreement the latter decide whether 
 they will submit the matter to arbitration under the 
 Act and whether the Arbitration Board shall be com- 
 posed of three or six members. It was on account 
 of the refusal of the roads to arbitrate the demands 
 of the trainmen and conductors under the provisions 
 of the old act requiring only three arbitrators that 
 the law was amended and the possibility of increasing 
 the number of arbitrators, particularly the number 
 representing the public, was provided for. 
 
 The result of increasing public representation on 
 arbitration boards and emphasizing the public interest 
 is understood in countries where compulsory arbitra- 
 tion is in practice. The public is interested in the 
 prevention of strikes and the prevention of strikes is 
 the purpose of compulsory arbitration. 
 
 In Canada the effort to prevent strikes through 
 compulsory arbitration is being tried out in a new 
 form. The Canadian Disputes Act does not make 
 strikes illegal ; it makes it illegal to strike successfully. 
 The Act provides that workers before striking must 
 
156 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 m 
 
 submit their demands to a government board for in- 
 vestigation and report; that they must submit the 
 demands thirty days in advance of the day they pro- 
 pose to call the strike; and that the workers must 
 continue at work during the investigation. Any 
 strike, called before the Board makes its report, is 
 illegal. This means, to every one who knows any- 
 thing about the calling of a strike, that the provision 
 serves the excellent purpose from the employer's 
 point of view of allowing him ample time to prepare 
 for a strike, to stock up, to engage strike-breakers, and 
 arrange his business affairs for a comfortable and 
 possibly a profitable shut-down. In short, the loss 
 of the strike, from the worker's point of view, is fully 
 assured. 
 
 The irony of the Act is reserved for the last pro- 
 vision. After the Board has made its investigation, 
 has made its report and its recommendation, after 
 it has used all the influence it can summon to induce 
 the workers to accept the award, then the workers 
 may, if they choose, go out on strike. The workers 
 are between the devil and the deep sea by that time. 
 The wind has been taken out of their strike; any 
 revolt at so late a day is doomed to failure. If in 
 desperation they accept the award, they are legally 
 bound to observe the terms laid down. However un- 
 just the terms may be, they cannot change them by 
 striking, which is equivalent to saying that they cannot 
 change them. 
 
 n 
 
 I 
 
 ARBITRATION 
 
 157 
 
 But there is in the Act still another piece of 
 hypocrisy. It not only permits strikes which are fore- 
 doomed to failure, but it speciously provides that em- 
 ployers may not lock out workers until the employers 
 have submitted their grievances in the same way and 
 under the same conditions as are required of workers. 
 No employers are seriously incommoded by restric- 
 tions on lockouts. They can effect a lockout as they 
 can blacklist and no one is the wiser. They can 
 discharge for apparent good and sufficient cause, they 
 can harass the men until they give up their work 
 voluntarily, or they can close down for business rea- 
 sons and take men back as it suits their convenience. 
 The conditions surrounding a lockout and a strike 
 are not parallel, and the provision assuming that they 
 are is false on the face of it. 
 
 The Canadian Trades and Labor Assembly un- 
 wittingly endorsed the Act when it was passed, but 
 
 at the end of three years' trial they are agitating for 
 
 its repeal. 
 
 Compulsory terms of service, that is, compulsory 
 
 arbitration, has been tried in Australia and in New 
 
 Zealand. In the opinion of many labor unionists, 
 
 it has failed. It was found in those countries that it 
 
 was impossible to punish men for failure to abide 
 
 by compulsory awards. Jailing several hundred or 
 
 thousands of men was quite out of the question. It 
 
 was found that fines could not be collected from men 
 
 without property; also, men in sympathy with con- 
 
iS8 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ARBITRATION 
 
 159 
 
 t 
 
 . 
 
 victed men could not be prevented from buying up 
 the convicted men's property and returning it to them. 
 Many labor unionists in New Zealand and Australia 
 are making a stand on the right of all men to work 
 when and where they choose, and to cease work in- 
 dividually or collectively as they see fit. It does not 
 appear that the government of New South Wales is 
 satisfied with its resorts to legal pains and penalties 
 in the experience of the industrial arbitration laws. 
 The editor of the American Federationist writes : 
 
 The Arbitration Act is nominally voluntary. An 
 organization consisting of at least fifteen members may 
 by a majority vote adopt a resolution to register under 
 the provisions of the act and thus secure " governmental 
 protection *' for trade agreements. The quality of the 
 voluntary element appears when it is observed that 
 organizations not registered are practically outlaw or- 
 ganizations whose members may be bound by any agree- 
 ment brought into existence by a registered organization 
 within their industry or district. Here lies the militant 
 employers' opportunity to exploit the workers— for mili- 
 tant employers flourish even in the Australasian Utopia. 
 
 They have developed a series of " arbitration unions." 
 Many spurious trade organizations have registered and 
 secured contracts, which, protected and enforced by gov- 
 ernmental agencies, bind the bona fide organized work- 
 ers to conditions to which they do not consent. Employ- 
 ers have found little difficulty in "inducing" fifteen 
 workers to form an ** arbitration union." Nor have they 
 always troubled themselves to secure the fifteen required 
 by law— the Australian papers state that six men or- 
 ganized an arbitration union for the coal miners at Hunt- 
 ley. The miaers, following the advice of their national 
 
 :< 
 * 
 
 labor organization, did not strike but joined the organi- 
 zation. Although some of the most reliable miners who 
 had homes and families in the locality were persecuted 
 for taking part in the affairs of the union, the bona fide 
 unionists persisted until they got control of the organiza- 
 tion and put the employers' agents out of office. Im- 
 mediately the new officers were discharged. Thus em- 
 ployers work under and by means of " ideal " legislation. 
 So it has come about that the workers of "a Country 
 Without Strikes " are divided into two factions — the 
 " lawful " workers who abide by peaceful agreements 
 even when manipulated and perverted to promote self- 
 interest of employers, and those who are seeking a new 
 freedom unrestricted by legalism and fines and imprison- 
 ment for quitting work. " Lawful " workers are given 
 the support and protection of constables and militia. 
 Legalism has created impatience if not contempt for law. 
 It makes easy the way for radical leaders and revolu- 
 tionary theories. . . . 
 
 Opinions expressed in a recent Australasian meeting 
 are of particular interest to those who have carefully 
 considered the merits of the compulsory arbitration 
 theory. In Adelaide, November nth, 1913, was held a 
 conference of the representatives of the industrial gov- 
 erning bodies of the commonwealth. Seven hundred 
 thousand workers were represented. One of the matters 
 considered was the formation of a Federal Grand Coun- 
 cil, consisting of representatives of the labor councils 
 of the Commonwealth. The delegate from Western 
 Australia, Mr. McCallum, objected to this proposal on 
 the ground that his state would not agree to giving mem- 
 bers of Parliament more extended powers in industrial 
 matters. 
 
 In considering industrial legislation, the right to 
 strike was recognized as a fundamental issue. . . . 
 
 Mr. Middleborough moved that the conference enter 
 
i6o 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 , 
 
 it 
 
 • i : 
 
 I 
 
 (J 
 
 "I 
 
 i ■ 
 
 ill 
 i 1 
 
 its protest against legislation prohibiting workers the use 
 of the strike, and affirm its repudiation of legislation 
 involving the imprisonment of workers participating in 
 industrial disputes.* 
 
 The purpose of compulsory arbitration is the pre- 
 vention of strikes. Its advocates assume that the 
 public is more seriously concerned in the consump- 
 tion of wealth than are the workers in its creation; 
 that the interruption of industry through strikes 
 is more disastrous to the public than is continuous, 
 indefinite labor under compulsory conditions to the 
 workers. 
 
 There are, indeed, any number of things which 
 we discover in our lifetime that other people consider 
 we are in duty bound to do, but we do not on that ac- 
 count necessarily do them. Whether or not a man 
 will perform some particular task must be in the na- 
 ture of things left to his decision. 
 
 The public may have a bad time of it if steamers 
 do not sail, or trains do not run, or if telephones 
 fail to connect, because dockers have refused to load 
 the steamers, firemen have refused to stoke the en- 
 gines, and telephone girls have refused to attend the : 
 switchboard. But no one of these workers, nor all 
 of them together, can be forced, successfully forced, 
 to serve the public on the terms it dictates, as vital ^ 
 as the going and coming of the public may be. 
 
 Every proposition to make strikes illegal or in- 
 effective is fought by organized labor more stren--" 
 
 ARBITRATION 
 
 i6i 
 
 uously than are all other measures for labor regula- 
 tion. The most conservative, as well as the most 
 revolutionary labor union man, believes that the only 
 defense of free labor against slave labor is the unim- 
 paired right to strike. 
 
 I. 
 
\m 
 
 
 Ill • 
 
 i 
 
 ^'P 
 
 CHAPTER XII 
 LEGISLATION AND THE UNIONS * 
 
 Auxiliary to direct action—Dangers of state action-Warning 
 from Australia-A. F. of L. and anti-trust law-Bartlett- 
 Bacon bill — Restriction of immigration — Seamen's bill- 
 Democratic political measures— Congressional measures ad- 
 vocated durmg four Congressional sessions— A. F. of L, 
 state legislative measures summarized. 
 
 The distinctive characteristic of labor unions is vol- 
 untary association; the voluntary association of 
 workers among themselves and in all of their in- 
 dustrial relations. When unions turn in the pursuit 
 of their ends from voluntary association to state pro- 
 tection they are usually prompted by some event or 
 series of events virhich have thwarted their voluntary 
 efforts. Their legislative activities are the by-prod- 
 ucts of direct action, that is, of collective bargaining, 
 trade agreements, boycotts, strikes. 
 
 As the courts render adverse decisions to labor 
 union efforts, the unions turn to the legislatures to 
 secure state endorsement of their position or needs. 
 In spite of the mass of legislation instigated by them, 
 they are keenly alive to the dangers of state action. 
 In commenting editorially on compulsory arbitration. 
 Samuel Gompers observes that "strike after strike 
 
 ♦See also Chapters on Boycott and Arbitration. 
 
 162 
 
 LEGISLATION AND THE UNIONS 163 
 
 occurs in New Zealand, and the Australian Common- 
 wealth under laws providing for both compulsory 
 arbitration and wages boards. Experience of the 
 workers in their efforts to abolish industrial injustice 
 has demonstrated that this legislation is ineffective 
 for that purpose, but is destructive of liberty and 
 progress. The important element in securing results 
 is the spirit, the resourcefulness, and the initiative of 
 the people themselves. Nothing is a substitute for in- 
 telligent initiative. Time after time men have put their 
 faith in theories, methods, and legislative devices. 
 They have found all agencies impotent to secure the 
 welfare of the people unless under the control of a 
 people able and alert in their own interests. They 
 have found theoretically imperfect machinery produc- 
 ing most gratifying results if only permitted the de- 
 velopment and exercise of initiative. 
 
 ** South Australian industrial legislation is based 
 upon the principle that the government should take 
 over the responsibility of securing industrial justice 
 and peace. But the government has been most sensi- 
 tive and responsive to the employers' interests. Em- 
 ployers have found the Arbitration Act a legal and 
 effective method of weakening unions." ^ 
 
 This attitude toward state control of labor con- 
 ditions and labor unions the Executive Council of the 
 American Federation expressed in reporting its con- 
 clusions and recommendations on a minimum wage 
 for women. 
 
PIf 
 
 '? ■' 
 
 
 ! f 
 I 
 
 ll 
 
 164 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 If it were proposed in this country to vest authority 
 m any tribunal to fix by law wages for men, labor would 
 protest by every means in its power. Through organiza- 
 tion the wages of men can and will be maintained at a 
 higher minimum than they would be if fixed by leeal 
 enactment. 
 
 But there is a far more significant ground for oppos- 
 ing the establishment by law of a minimum wage for men. 
 The principle that organization is the most potent means 
 for a shorter work day and for a higher standard of wages 
 applies to women workers equally as to men. But the 
 fact must be recognized that the organization of women 
 workers constitutes a separate and more difficult prob- 
 lem. Women do not organize as readily or as stably 
 as men. They are, therefore, more easily exploited . . . 
 an industry which denies to all its workers and par- 
 ticularly denies to its women and minors who are 
 toilers a living wage is unfit and should not be per- 
 mitted to exist . . . legislation of this character is 
 experimental and sufficient experience with it has not 
 been had to enable us to secure . . . information as 
 to Its tendency and its effect upon wages and industrial 
 conditions. ...» 
 
 When Theodore Roosevelt was president, he de- 
 nied the postal-clerks, as government employees, the 
 right of petition as well as organization. It was an 
 object lesson to labor unions suggesting what they 
 might expect from government ownership or con- 
 trol. 
 
 The most important legislative measures advanced 
 by the Executive Council of the American Federa- 
 tion and its state organizations apply to the de- 
 fense of labor organization and labor union tactics. 
 
 LEGISLATION AND THE UNIONS 165 
 
 During 191 3- 14 the National Executive Council was 
 largely occupied in an effort to secure a federal statute 
 which would exempt unions from classification under 
 the Sherman Anti-trust law as combinations in re- 
 straint of trade. The courts had so interpreted the 
 law in the case against the United Hatters and the sup- 
 pression of their boycott; in the injunction against 
 officers of the American Federation for the publication 
 of the Buck Stove and Range Company in their " We 
 Don't Patronize " list. Under the same interpretation 
 officers of the United Mine Workers and of the 
 Western Federation of Miners had been indicted dur- 
 ing their West Virginia, Colorado, and Michigan 
 strikes. 
 
 These efforts of the courts to so construe the law 
 signified to labor the dissolution of its unions. The 
 opposition fight which the American Federation waged 
 against such coristruction was long and costly to or- 
 ganized labor. The position of the Federation is 
 quoted at length on account of the importance of the 
 issue. 
 
 Without further delay, the citizens of the United 
 States must decide whether they wish to outlaw or- 
 ganized labor. Only a few months ago the officials of 
 the United Mine Workers were indicted under the Sher- 
 man Anti-Trust law because they helped the miners of 
 West Virginia to break the shackles by which the mining 
 companies held them helpless objects of exploitation. 
 The mine operators forced the constituted authorities 
 of the state to do their bidding. The miners could ap- 
 
i66 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ii ' < 
 
 '4 
 
 I 
 1 
 
 peal to no one for justice. Their only defense lay in their 
 ability to enforce their rights through their united, or- 
 ganized power. To strip them of that defense is the pur- 
 pose of the litigation begun by the indictment charging 
 that organization with restraint of trade. These same 
 officers of the United Mine Workers have again been 
 indicted under the same ** anti-trust " law because they 
 are helping the miners of Colorado to resist the tyranny 
 of the Standard Oil Company, which seeks to evade 
 compliance with labor laws of the state. The " in- 
 dicted " officers of the miners are (call it "conspiring," 
 if you please) engaged in an effort to rid the state of 
 Colorado of government by mine guards in order to 
 reestablish civil government, government by law. 
 
 The Federal grand jury's indictment charges the of- 
 ficers of the miners' organization with establishing a 
 monopoly of mine labor in the United States and Canada 
 and with organizing a conspiracy to restrain interstate 
 commerce. 
 
 The law of the land assures to workers the right 
 to organize. All who have any knowledge of the world 
 of industry concede that without organization the wage- 
 workers are helpless victims of the industrial forces that 
 are seeking their own self-interest. Practical men of 
 business refuse to deal with a weak union, for its agree- 
 ments would have neither advantage nor force ; but as 
 a matter of course they recognize and deal with strong 
 unions, and adjust their business to conform to the new 
 situation. It follows, then, that control of all the work- 
 ers in a trade increases the success and the efficiency 
 of the organization in securing better terms for a 
 greater number of workers, and in turn protects the 
 fair employer from competition with producers who care 
 not how they grind their employees so long as they also 
 grind out profits. 
 
 The right to organize is a sham, a trick, a deceit, 
 
 A 
 
 m. 
 
 LEGISLATION AND THE UNIONS 167 
 
 unless it carries with it the right to organize effectively 
 and the right to use that organized power to further the 
 interests of the workers. This implied right must be as- 
 sured. If it is alleged that acts in themselves criminal 
 or unlawful are committed in endeavors to effect organi- 
 zation or to secure the benefits of organization, let those 
 acts be dealt with under due process of law. But in 
 the name of free labor, in the name of free government 
 and free society, let the right to organize never for one 
 instant be menaced or withheld. That right is the foun- 
 dation upon which all else is builded. . . . 
 
 Union men of America, do you realize that at any 
 time your home, your savings, may be levied upon if your 
 organization has attained any degree of success? Do 
 you realize that you and the officers of your organization 
 may be imprisoned for daring to defend and to promote 
 your welfare and for the exercise of normal activities 
 to increase the power and efficiency of your union ? Have 
 you compared your condition with that of the unor- 
 ganized so that you realize what will be the effect of 
 depriving you of the right to organize? 
 
 When you have seriously considered these ques- 
 tions you will realize the imperative necessity that de- 
 volves upon all men and women who labor — the neces- 
 sity of securing amendment to the Sherman Anti-Trust 
 law that clearly and specifically prevents the application 
 of that law to the voluntary organization of the workers 
 — the unions. 
 
 That law, as now interpreted and applied, consti- 
 tutes the most serious menace to the labor movement. 
 That law, which was intended to benefit human beings, 
 to prevent or check monopoly and absolute control over 
 the products of labor and of the soil, to assure to the 
 people the necessities of life at reasonable prices, has 
 proved useless in establishing control or regulation over 
 the trusts and monopolies. In a spirit of ironic glee these 
 
i68 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 I', 1 
 
 
 
 1 : 
 
 same monopolies, trusts, and corporations, unharmed by 
 the law which was to have regulated them, now turn this 
 law against the human beings who were to have been 
 protected. 
 
 Is the conscience of the American people so dead, 
 is their sense of justice so dormant, that they will tol- 
 erate that horses, wheat, hay, sugar, hogs, shall be placed 
 on equality before the law with human beings? . . .• 
 
 The bill introduced in Congress, known as the 
 Bartlett-Bacon Bill, reflected the attitude of the unions 
 and their demand for a recognition that property 
 rights and labor rights were not the same.' It pro- 
 vided : 
 
 Sec. I. That it shall not be unlawful for persons em- 
 ployed or seeking employment to enter any arrangements, 
 agreements, or combinations with the view of lessening 
 the hours of labor or of increasing their wages or of 
 bettering their condition; nor shall any arrangements, 
 agreements, or combinations be unlawful among per- 
 sons engaged in horticulture or agriculture when made 
 with a view of enhancing the price of agricultural or 
 horticultural products; and no restraining order or in- 
 junction shall be granted by any court of the United 
 States, or by any judge thereof, in any case between an 
 employer and employee, or between employers and em- 
 ployees, or between persons employed and persons seek- 
 ing employment, or involving or growing out of a dispute 
 concerning terms or conditions of employment in any 
 case, or concerning any agreement, arrangement, or com- 
 bination of persons engaged in horticulture or agriculture 
 with the view of enhancing prices as aforesaid, or any 
 act or acts done in pursuance thereof, unless in either 
 case said injunction be necessary to prevent irreparable 
 
 LEGISLATION AND THE UNIONS 169 
 
 injury to property or to a property right of the party 
 making the application, for which there is no adequate 
 remedy at law; and such property or property right 
 must be particularly described in the application, which 
 must be sworn to by the applicant or by his agent or at- 
 torney. 
 
 In construing this Act the right to enter into the rela- 
 tion of employer and employee, to change that relation 
 and to assume and create a new relation of employer 
 and employee, and to perform and carry on business 
 in such relation with any person in any place or do 
 work and labor as an employee shall be held and con- 
 strued to be a personal and not a property right. In 
 all cases involving the violation of the contract of em- 
 ployment by either the employee or employer, where no 
 irreparable damage is about to be committed upon the 
 property or property right of either, no injunction shall 
 be granted, but the parties shall be left to their remedy 
 at law. 
 
 Sec. 2. That no person or persons who are employed 
 or seeking employment or other labor shall be indicted, 
 prosecuted, or tried in any court of the United States for 
 entering into any arrangements, agreements, or combina- 
 tions between themselves as such employees or laborers, 
 made with a view of lessening the number of hours of 
 labor or increasing their wages or bettering their condi- 
 tion, or for any act done in pursuance thereof, unless 
 said act is in itself unlawful; nor shall any person or 
 persons who may enter into any arrangements 
 or agreements or combinations among themselves for 
 the purpose of engaging in horticulture or agriculture with 
 a view of enhancing the price of agricultural or horticul- 
 tural products be indicted, prosecuted, or tried in any court 
 of the United States on account of making or entering into 
 such arrangements, agreements, or combinations, or any 
 act done in pursuance thereof, unless said act in itself is 
 unlawful. 
 
 :h 
 
170 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 I 
 
 it I 
 
 People may differ as to whether it is logical or 
 illogical to distinguish between associations of capital 
 and of labor but no one who understands the opera- 
 tions of unions can doubt that their classification 
 under this law would result in harassing and con- 
 stant litigation if not in their actual dissolution. 
 
 From the experience of the unions in the courts 
 it is clear to them that successful coercions of capital 
 would be met with summary orders of restraint from 
 the courts. Practically all advances won by labor in 
 every new field coerce capital and directly and indi- 
 rectly restrain interstate commerce. Under such cir- 
 cumstances labor union measures become conspiracies. 
 
 The American Federation of Labor has recently 
 taken the position that federal restriction of immi- 
 gration is an important adjunct to labor organization. 
 Anti-Asiatic sentiment of labor union men in Cali- 
 fornia has contributed in a large measure to the 
 change of attitude. 
 
 The American Federation has also included in its 
 legislative program measures affecting the interests of 
 certain classes of workers. One of the most impor- 
 tant recent measures of this kind was the Seamen's 
 Bill, which provided for greater safety at sea, against 
 involuntary servitude, the increase of a ship's crew, 
 and a standard of seamanship. 
 
 Still another class of legislation promoted by the 
 Federation relates directly to increasing the demo- 
 cratic control of the government; direct legislation 
 
 LEGISLATION AND THE UNIONS 171 
 
 through popular initiative and referendum, the recall 
 of officials, the popular election of judges, the elimina- 
 tion of difficulties in the amendment of the federal 
 constitution. 
 
 Legislative measures to improve directly the eco- 
 nomic conditions of labor (excepting government em- 
 ployees) have not been of such vital concern as have 
 measures affecting organization. For the improve- 
 ment of those conditions the unions rely principally on 
 their voluntary and collective efforts. 
 
 The Legislative Committee of the Federation re- 
 ported the federal legislation which it had instigated 
 since 1906, as well as legislation it had endorsed at 
 the suggestion of others. The appended list illustrates 
 a progressive interest in legislation and the character 
 of the state protection it is now demanding. It will 
 be noted that it was instrumental in securing enact- 
 ments in its behalf on seven counts in the Fifty-ninth 
 Congress ; on eleven in the Sixtieth Congress, on six- 
 teen in the Sixty-First Congress, and on thirty in the 
 Sixty-Second.* 
 
 f -1 
 
 Record of Fifty-ninth Congress 
 
 Employers' liability act secured. Immigration 
 laws amended and strengthened. Law limiting rail- 
 road men's hours of labor to sixteen in any one day en- 
 acted. Federal investigation of industrial conditions 
 among working women and children ordered. Amend- 
 
172 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 i 
 
 h 
 
 ments to Chinese Exclusion law defeated. Ship sub- 
 sidy and conscription defeated. Anti-compulsory 
 pilotage proposition defeated. 
 
 Record of Sixtieth Congress 
 
 Employers' liability law passed substituting the act 
 passed by the Fifty-ninth Congress which was an- 
 nulled by the United States Supreme Court. Compen- 
 sation for injuries to government employees' act passed. 
 Child labor law for the District of Columbia en- 
 acted. Proposed reduction of wages of employees of 
 Panama Canal Railroad defeated. Proposal to waive 
 contract labor provision of immigration laws in Ha- 
 waii defeated. Efforts to establish censor of publica- 
 tions in Post Office Department defeated. First fed- 
 eral appropriation for investigation of accidents in coal 
 mines secured. Self -emptying ash pan law for loco- 
 motives enacted. Law enacted disapproving unfair 
 personal injury act of territory of New Mexico. 
 Compulsory investigation of labor disputes bill de- 
 feated (a mischievous proposition intended as a fore- 
 runner for compulsory arbitration). Ship subsidy and 
 conscription bill again defeated. 
 
 Record of Sixty-first Congress 
 
 Employers' liability act amended and strength- 
 ened. Federal employees' compensation for injuries 
 act extended. Law passed requiring railroads to re- 
 
 LEGISLATION AND THE UNIONS i73 
 
 port all accidents. Standard equipment act for rail- 
 roads passed (a valuable safety appliance measure). 
 Federal locomotive boiler inspection law enacted. 
 Immigration law amended and strengthened, relating 
 to deportation, also prohibiting interstate transporta- 
 tion of so-called "white slaves." Eight-hour pro- 
 ,vision included in act authorizing construction of 
 revenue cutters and in naval appropriation acts. Postal 
 Savings Bank law enacted. Bureau of Mines es- 
 tablished. Federal Commission appointed on 
 Workmen's Compensation and Employers' Lia- 
 bility. Porto Rican legislation enacted provid- 
 ing for an eight-hour day on public works, a 
 law prohibiting employment of children under four- 
 teen years of age, and an employers' liability law. 
 Amendment to Constitution providing for income tax 
 passed. Law enacted compelling publicity of political 
 campaign contributions. Child labor law for the Dis- 
 trict of Columbia amended and strengthened. Rules 
 of House of Representatives amended hindering the 
 practice of smothering legislation in committee. 
 
 ? 
 
 Record of Sixty-second Congress 
 
 " Gag " rule abolished ; rights of hearing, petition, 
 and association restored to post-office and other civil 
 service employees. United States constitutional 
 amendment providing for popular election of 
 Senators passed. General eight-hour day bill 
 
a 
 
 174 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ii 
 
 M 
 
 I* < 
 
 ^! 
 
 on contracts for public work enacted; eight 
 hours in the contracts of fortification bill pro- 
 vided ; eight hours in the contracts of naval bill pro- 
 vided; eight hours for letter carriers and clerks in post- 
 offices made operative. Anti-Phosphorus Match Bill 
 enacted. Children's Bureau established. Extension of 
 Federal Compensation for Injuries Act to Bureau of 
 Mines employees. Industrial Relations Commission 
 provided. Second-class postage rate assured for trade 
 union and fraternal publications. Eight-hour law of 
 1892 amended by extending it to dredgmen. Law en- 
 acted providing for a Department of Labor, the Secre- 
 tary of same to be a member of the President's cabinet. 
 Bureau of Mines Act amended and strengthened. Sea- 
 men's bill passed Congress, vetoed by President Taft. 
 Immigration bill passed Congress, vetoed by President 
 Taft. Anti-Trust proviso passed Congress exempting 
 organizations of labor from prosecution under Sher- 
 man law, vetoed by President Taft. Free Smoker 
 bill passed (in interest of cigarmakers). Physical 
 valuation law for railroads and express companies 
 passed. Parcel Post law passed. Law passed estab- 
 lishing the three-watch system in the merchant marine, 
 for masters, mates, and pilots. Federal investigation 
 ordered of the industrial conditions prevailing in the 
 iron and steel industry, also a congressional investiga- 
 tion ordered of the United States Steel Corporation. 
 Increased appropriations obtained for rescue work in 
 Bureau of Mines. Public construction in Govern- 
 
 i. i 
 
 LEGISLATION AND THE UNIONS 175 
 
 ment navy yards of naval vessels and colliers secured. 
 Secured five cents an hour advance for pressmen in 
 Government Printing Office. Secured 10 per cent, in- 
 crease in wages for employees of Naval Gun Factory. 
 Trade unionist appointed first Secretary of the Depart- 
 ment of Labor. Federal investigation of textile strike- 
 at Lawrence, Mass. Congressional investigation Tay- 
 lor " stop watch " system. The amendment to the 
 Federal Constitution providing for an income tax has 
 been ratified by three- fourths of the States and is now 
 effective. 
 
 The legislative program of the state branches repre- 
 senting one year's work, 19 12- 13, gives an idea of the 
 extent of the legislation and the demands which the 
 Federation is making in different states of the coun- 
 try. The laws supported by the state federations were 
 reported to The American Federationist and sum- 
 marized : 
 
 Workingmen's Compensation Laws were enacted in 
 Iowa, Minnesota, West Virginia, Texas, Montana, Ohio, 
 and Oregon; Illinois redrafted a Compensation Law, 
 Kansas amended its law. In California a comprehensive 
 Workingmen's Compensation Insurance and Safety Act 
 will supersede the enactments which were in force. Ver- 
 mont created a commission to investigate the subject and 
 legalized compensation acts. 
 
 Employers' Liability. Liability laws were passed in 
 Florida and Arkansas. In Maine it was provided that 
 when contributory negligence is pleaded in case of fatal 
 accidents, the burden of proof shall rest upon the de- 
 fendant. 
 
176 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 t V,, 
 
 
 I II 
 
 Health and Sanitary Laws were enacted in several 
 states. In Iowa frost glasses for locomotives were made 
 a legal requirement. In Montana the heating of vesti- 
 bules of street cars was provided for. Legislation requir- 
 ing reports on industrial diseases was enacted in Ohio, 
 Maine, and Minnesota. Laws for the prevention and 
 treatment of tuberculosis were adopted by Minnesota and 
 California. Furnishing of seats in certain industries was 
 required in Arkansas. New York established as a divi- 
 sion of the Department of Labor a department of in- 
 dustrial hygiene. Measures to prevent occupational dis- 
 eases in mines, machine shops, paint shops, and foundries 
 were adopted in Missouri, Illinois, and Pennsylvania. 
 Sanitary conditions in bakeshops were regulated in New 
 York and Minnesota. California provided for the sanita- 
 tion and inspection of labor camps. A New Hampshire 
 law was enacted fixing the standard for sanitary manage- 
 ment of barber shops. 
 
 Safety devices for the protection of workers and con- 
 sumers were passed in several states, such as the Full 
 Crew Laws of California, New York, and Arkansas. 
 Regulations in bricklaying in New York ; fire escape pro- 
 visions in Iowa and New Hampshire ; provisions for head- 
 lights on locomotives in Iowa, Minnesota, Colorado, 
 Florida, and Illinois. Minnesota made it compulsory to 
 report accidents in certain industries and the use of cer- 
 tain safety appliances ; it increased the width of the clear- 
 ing required on either side of railway tracks. Pennsyl- 
 vania made it compulsory to use blowers on metal polish- 
 ing machinery and to establish regulations for plastering. 
 California prescribed the use of scaffolds for painters, 
 telephones in mines, signals, hatchways, and headlights. 
 Kansas regulated the use of switch lights controlling the 
 movement of trains. Massachusetts required safety de- 
 vices on street cars. 
 
 Convict labor legislation was enacted at the instigation 
 of four state federations. Illinois provided for the use 
 
 LEGISLATION AND THE UNIONS i77 
 
 of convict labor on roads. Texas adopted a law requiring 
 the use of the label " convict made " upon all convict 
 goods made or offered for sale. Virginia abolished the 
 contract convict labor system. Ohio also prohibited the 
 contract convict labor system and provided for the prison 
 made label on goods from other states. 
 
 Loan shark evils were minimized by the passage of 
 laws in Minnesota, Colorado, and Missouri. 
 
 Mining legislation was enacted in eight states. In 
 Pennsylvania provisions were made for hospitals, a 
 checking system, and the abolition of dockage. Iowa 
 extended the protection of the Board of Health to cover 
 mining camps and provided for the examination of gyp- 
 sum in mines. Illinois passed a nine-hour law for min- 
 ers. Kansas required bath-houses and regulated the de- 
 livery of powder in mines. Colorado made eight hours 
 the legal workday for miners. Missouri compelled the 
 posting of notices describing the conditions in inspected 
 mines. Ohio regulated the right of action in case of 
 
 death in mines. 
 
 Eight-hour day legislation was reported from five 
 states. Colorado established it for miners, Missouri for 
 glass factories and silica mines, Ohio, Massachusetts, 
 and Oregon for public works. 
 
 Hours for Women were regulated in several states. 
 In Montana, Massachusetts, and Minnesota nine hours 
 is the legal workday. New York extended its nine-hour 
 law to include women in mercantile establishments. In 
 California the application of the eight-hour law was ex- 
 tended. In Texas, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Rhode 
 Island the week's work for women was limited to 54 
 hours and in New Hampshire to 55 hours. Missouri 
 extended its nine-hour law. Colorado ratified an eight- 
 hour law by referendum. Oregon will submit an eight- 
 hour measure to the people for ratification. 
 
 Mothers' Pension Laws were adopted in Massachu- 
 
178 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 » 
 
 H 
 
 W 
 
 setts, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, California, New Hamp- 
 shire, and Ohio. 
 
 Minimum Wage Laws for women were enacted in 
 Mmnesota, Utah, Colorado, Washington, and Cali- 
 fornia. 
 
 Child Labor Legislation was reported from six states. 
 New Hampshire fixed the employment age at four- 
 teen years. Florida limited the age for office workers 
 to twelve years, and factory workers to fourteen. It 
 raised the ages in certain occupations dangerous to health 
 and morals. Maine prohibited the employment of chil- 
 dren between the ages of fourteen and sixteen for those 
 not meeting educational tests. Minnesota limited the 
 age of employment to sixteen years for occupations 
 physically or morally dangerous. The employment of 
 children on the stage under sixteen without notification 
 of guardians was forbidden and the employment of all 
 children on the stage under ten. California established 
 an eight-hour day for miners under eighteen employed in 
 certain industries. 
 
 Semi-monthly Payment of Wages laws were enacted 
 in Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. New Hampshire 
 adopted a bi-monthly regulation. California regulated 
 payment of wages in seasonal industries. Texas regu- 
 lated the bonding of stevedores to ensure the wages of 
 dock laborers, provided for liens to secure the wages of 
 timber workers and levee workers. Ohio enacted a 
 mechanic's alien law. 
 
 Private Employment Bureaus were regulated by laws 
 enacted in California and Minnesota. 
 
 Trades Disputes Acts were enacted in five states. 
 Peaceful persuasion law was passed in New Hampshire. 
 California, Minnesota, Maine, and New Hampshire made 
 it obligatory upon those advertising for labor during a 
 strike to state the existence of a strike. 
 
 Conciliation and Arbitration Boards were established 
 in New Hampshire and Vermont. Laws were passed 
 
 LEGISLATION AND THE UNIONS 179 
 
 providing for the constitution of arbitration and concilia- 
 tion boards, when needed, in Iowa. 
 
 State Bureaus of Labor were organized in Kansas and 
 reorganized in New York and Minnesota. Montana 
 created a Commissioner of Labor as distinct from the 
 office of Commissioner of Agriculture. Ohio provided 
 for a state industrial commission which will consolidate 
 six state departments and have power of inspection, ad- 
 ministration, and regulation. 
 
 An Anti-injunction Law was adopted in Montana 
 which provided that injunctions cannot be issued in labor 
 dispute cases when they would not apply under other 
 conditions. Massachusetts enacted two laws defining the 
 rights of striking workers and restricting the issuance of 
 injunctions in labor disputes. 
 
 Direct Legislation was reported by four states. Min- 
 nesota, Washington, and Texas adopted the Initiative 
 and Referendum. Washington established the recall ex- 
 cept for judges. Minnesota limited the power of the 
 courts to declare laws unconstitutional.' 
 
 n 
 
f. 
 
 LABOR AND THE COURTS 
 
 i8i 
 
 1^' 
 
 I 
 
 fi' iiiii M 
 
 
 I! 
 
 3j.j t 
 
 CHAPTER XIII 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN LABOR AND THE 
 
 COURTS * 
 
 Court precedent — Creation of new relations and institutions by 
 labor — Refusal of courts to take motives into consideration 
 — Defendant, labor's role — Position of unemployed men and 
 the court position — Trial of Bridge and Structural Iron 
 \yorkers— Provocative acts of Erectors' Association— State 
 disregard of Iron Workers' interests— A judge the natural 
 protector of vested rights— Courts of law do not claim to be 
 courts of justice— Analogy between political offenders and 
 condemned labor unionists. 
 
 At one time such submission to authority as was ex- 
 pressed recently by a negro woman brought before 
 the New York night court was expected of the com- 
 mon run of men. The woman had been arrested bv 
 an officer in citizen's clothes. Without explaining to 
 her that he was a policeman he removed her by force 
 from the street-car where she had resented the insults 
 of a white woman. Naturally she fought against her 
 forceful expulsion and for her freedom. Some hours 
 later before the magistrate in abject apology for her 
 resistance she said : " I didn't know, jedge, that he was 
 an offica of the law with more rights than me ner 
 anybody." She had braved the club of the man but 
 she bowed reverently before the officer of the law. 
 
 ♦See also Chapters: Violence, Strikes and Violence, Legisla- 
 tion and the Unions. 
 
 i8o 
 
 Such expressions carry with them comfort and reas- 
 surance to authorities although less is required in the 
 interest of public safety. 
 
 All that law and order demand to-day is that dis- 
 satisfaction with institutions and particularly with 
 court decrees and administration be expressed through 
 the courts and legislatures as constitutions provide. 
 This requirement presupposes that the courts and the 
 legislatures are susceptible to new impressions. The 
 purpose and efforts of the labor unions are to introduce 
 new relations between men and to establish new in- 
 stitutions and new codes. The courts rest on old 
 codes and old relations and base their decrees on the 
 precedents established by previous decisions. 
 
 At the instigation of the unions, the legislatures 
 have enacted new laws to further the union purpose 
 and to protect the organizations. But the laws which 
 have been passed by the legislatures are subject to 
 annulment or the value of the law if upheld may be 
 lost to labor through the particular interpretation 
 given it by the judge who has no understanding or 
 sympathy with labor unions. Even court precedent 
 does not establish for practical use the legality of boy- 
 cotts, picketing, or trade agreements. Picketing may 
 be legal but a picket in active operation is disturbing 
 the peace. Boycotts are being outlawed by court in- 
 terpretations and a union as such may at any time 
 be dissolved. 
 
 But labor's particular quarrel with the courts is that 
 
 / 
 
l82 
 
 
 Jl'i 
 
 '1 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 they refuse to take motives into account or provoca- 
 tions for coercion; that courts are incompetent to dis- 
 tinguish between acts which are inspired by selfish 
 interests and acts which result from efforts to settle 
 issues of social significance; that new issues involved 
 in labor disputes cannot intelligently be decided on 
 precedents which were not concerned with the labor 
 issue, particularly when a court fails to distinguish 
 between working men as human beings and working- 
 men as commodities. 
 
 As labor unions now and then secure a footing or 
 recognition in the community they have presumed 
 on their new position and in the character of an ac- 
 cepted institution turned to the courts in the role of 
 plaintiff. But it is significant that labor's usual role is 
 that of defendant. Labor knows that the courts are not 
 an agency for the setting up of new conceptions and 
 new relations. But when a labor unionist finds himself 
 in the court as defendant of his own movement, in- 
 variably the limitations of the court are forgotten. 
 The propaganda nature of the defendant rises to the 
 occasion. He thinks of the court as laymen are 
 taught to think of it, not as a court of law but as a 
 house of justice. The opportunity is seized to es- 
 tablish the great truth to which the truth of the minor 
 act for which he was indicted is an unimportant in- 
 cident. He is obsessed by the thought of a new oppor- 
 tunity to pursue his mission and he loses sight of court 
 procedure, and if he is reminded of it, believes that 
 
 LABOR AND THE COURTS 
 
 183 
 
 legal practice will give way before the presentation 
 of motives and provocations. 
 
 During a period of unemployment in New York 
 City, when according to official estimates from icx5,ooo 
 to 300,000 men and women were out of work, a move- 
 ment was started by some unemployed men to de- 
 mand and if necessary to take food and shelter where- 
 ever it might be had. Some of the men belonged to 
 the trade unions, others to industrial unions and some 
 to no unions at all. They all accepted the union propo- 
 sition that it was harmful to labor as a whole for 
 individual men to work below union rates to bridge 
 over temporary periods of unemployment; they re- 
 fused to regard labor as a drug on the market and sell 
 out at bargain rates ; they declared that they were not 
 responsible for the shortage in employment but that so- 
 ciety was; they demanded that the community regard 
 them and that the men regard themselves with the con- 
 sideration which men deserved who were the victims of 
 industrial fluctuations created by society; on account 
 of certain regulations connected with the city's pro- 
 vision for lodging as well as inadequate accommoda- 
 tion they demanded shelter and food from churches 
 and other institutions. 
 
 Their unbidden entrance into a church brought them 
 before the court. Their counsel undertook to explain 
 the situation and the position of the men. The magis- 
 trate tried to make clear that the court had nothing 
 to do with the fact that the men could not get work. 
 
i84 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 I 
 
 Ifl 
 
 I 
 
 that the court was most assuredly not the place to 
 thrash out the remarkable conceptions of these men 
 as to their rights ; the business of the court was to up- 
 hold the law. He gave out the following statement 
 to the press : 
 
 The repeated attempts of counsel to befog the issues 
 here and create a prejudice in the name of hunger for 
 these defendents is inexcusable and not in keeping with 
 the high standards of practice. The only issue involved 
 here is one of law and order. ^ 
 
 If such irrelevant issues as conceived by these un- 
 employed men were admitted, legal practice and regu- 
 lar procedure would surely lose something of its prac- 
 tice and its regularity. It is difficult to realize what 
 would be the development of a court of law which 
 admitted evidence so far afield of the mere charge of 
 " disorderly conduct " and " unlawful assembly " with 
 which it was in the present case alone concerned. The 
 purpose of the men and the ideas they represented 
 were relegated to other meeting places. As the friends 
 of the men left the court at the close of the trial they 
 were saying on the court house steps, " What a farce." 
 It is a common comment heard on the steps when a 
 case against labor is lost and closed. 
 
 When thirty-eight union men were tried in Indian- 
 apolis on the charge of conspiring in the transportation 
 of dynamite, all evidence was admitted which would 
 tend to show that the men on trial favored destructive 
 
 LABOR AND THE COURTS 
 
 185 
 
 or illegal practices. Such evidence it was supposed 
 would throw light on the character of the men and 
 the plausibility of the charge against them. From 
 the point of view of union men no fair judgment could 
 be rendtred which left out of account the aggressions 
 of the Erectors' Association. The Association had 
 driven the union to a fight for its life. But all material 
 concerning provocation, all evidence offered by the 
 defence which would throw light on the practices of 
 the Association were ruled out. In the opinion of 
 labor unionists the provocation warranted at least an 
 extenuation of sentence. But provocation was im- 
 material to a court of law which was concerned merely 
 with the fact that the men had or had not transported 
 dynamite and on the proof of that isolated fact they 
 would be acquitted or sentenced; sentenced as crim- 
 inals bent on malicious destruction. 
 
 If the provocative acts of the Erectors' Association 
 and its character had been admitted, it would have 
 •been shown that the Association in its efforts to stran- 
 gle the union was robbing the men working in the 
 industry of their only protection against a wanton 
 disregard for their life and safety exhibited daily by 
 the corporations represented in the Erectors' Associa- 
 tion. But according to court practice such evidence is 
 immaterial. 
 
 The disregard or disrespect for the union opposition 
 and for its grievance against the Erectors' Associa- 
 tion was carried far beyond the refusal to admit evi- 
 
' < 
 
 
 
 i86 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 dence. The state as prosecutor had seized all the 
 books and correspondence of the union and gave the 
 Association free access to them in spite of the fact 
 that they furnished the Association with material of 
 inestimable value in their work of crushing the union. 
 The reasons for the action of the men were not only 
 immaterial to the court but the interests of the union 
 were insulted and abused in the progress of the case. 
 The question of prejudice of judges and juries is 
 not strictly a court question. It is a part of the eternal 
 struggle to change or modify public opinion and create 
 new social values. Labor's serious effort in that di- 
 rection is made through its own self -created channels 
 and its own public forums. But a judge of a court 
 in the position of conservator of established opinions 
 and customs is in the nature of the case the least sus- 
 ceptible of men to the labor appeal. He is the natural 
 protector of vested interests and is so recognized by 
 capital. If a dispute reaches the stage where arbitra- 
 tion is demanded, capital is usually well satisfied to 
 accept judges as the arbitrators. Labor invariably ob- 
 jects. It is discounting imposed limitations of judges, 
 charged as they are with maintaining the old order, 
 to expect them to render labor decisions, charge juries 
 or inflict sentences with sympathy or even with under- 
 standing of the new assumptions which the labor 
 movement represents. The free use of court injunc- 
 tions is due to an ancient conception of property and 
 property rights. 
 
 I 
 
 P 
 
 LABOR AND THE COURTS 
 
 187 
 
 If labor unions should come to the point of regard- 
 ing courts as courts of law instead of courts of jus- 
 tice (which is indeed a layman's term) considerable 
 confusion and litigation would be avoided. With that 
 conception well established the unions would cease to 
 harass the courts with their own peculiar ideas and 
 inadmissable briefs. The courts might contribute 
 toward a clearer understanding of their own limita- 
 tions if they refused to interfere with labor opinions 
 and expressions made in labor's own meeting places. 
 If the courts liberally interpreted the welj-established 
 precedents for free speech instead of reversing its 
 own rulings where labor is concerned, labor would 
 learn to confine its defence of its position to more 
 fitting places than courts of law. 
 
 The position of the condemned labor unionist and 
 the political offender are analogous. The offense of 
 the labor unionist is in the interest of a cause, it is not 
 personal. Its convicted members are martyrs. The 
 deep resentment of the unionists against the courts is 
 largely due to the failure of judges to apprehend this 
 fact. 
 
I 
 
 ^Ir 1 
 
 -iil 
 
 mk 
 
 ^^^? 
 
 CHAPTER XIV 
 
 VIOLENCE 
 
 A national interest in labor violence — Revolutionary I. W. W. 
 program — Lawrence strike — The McNamara plea of guilty — 
 Effort to involve union labor — Union position — Dynamite 
 conspiracy, union position — Violence in industry and of capi- 
 tal — State violence. 
 
 The violence of labor unions became a topic of na- 
 tional interest in 191 1 and 1912. It was no new 
 thing for the enemies of labor unions to accuse the 
 unions of violence and no new thing for the unions 
 to repudiate it. But the violence used against labor 
 unions befogged the effort to make it appear that 
 violence was a distinguishing trait of labor unions. 
 The labor disputes of a year including thousands of 
 workers were themselves important testimonials to 
 the restraint and discipline among union men. 
 
 It was the sudden emergence of the Industrial 
 Workers of the World into a position of importance 
 and the confession of the McNamara brothers that 
 turned the charge of violence both of labor and capital 
 into a national issue. 
 
 Until the mill workers of Lawrence struck, the In- 
 dustrial Workers with their revolutionary program 
 
 had not been seriously regarded by the country at 
 
 188 
 
 VIOLENCE 
 
 189 
 
 < 
 
 large. The success of the strike; the consequent in- 
 crease in wage rates in the textile mills throughout 
 New England; the effect of the strike on tariff dis- 
 cussions; its disclosure to the world that the woolen 
 industry was parasitic, thriving on the degradation 
 of immigrant families, shocked the community into a 
 consciousness not of the degradation only but the 
 power, the force, the violence of the ideas of a daunt- 
 less and revolutionary union. 
 
 The effort was made during the strike to create the 
 impression that the strikers were intent on murder and 
 destruction. What else could the intention be of 
 leaders who told the strikers that the mills and all 
 they produced in the mills belonged to them ? that the 
 owners of the mills were exploiters? Reports of an 
 industrial rebellion in Lawrence drew spectators and 
 representatives of the press from all parts of the 
 country. These interested citizens heard the speeches 
 violent in ideas, but reported back to their editors or 
 friends that the violence in Lawrence, the physical 
 violence, was the violence of industrial conditions and 
 the violence of municipal and state officials. They re- 
 ported that the beating, the clubbing, and the shooting 
 of private citizens was not done by the strikers but by 
 the militia. It was the militia who brutally interfered 
 with parents who chose to send their children out of 
 Lawrence to be cared for by comrades during the 
 strike. 
 
 In other strikes of the Industrial Workers it was 
 
 \ 
 
rt: ; 
 
 190 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 liN 
 
 r \ 
 
 I 
 r ' 
 
 the authorized representatives of law and order who 
 were convicted of violence by disinterested citizens, 
 not the strikers or their leaders. And still the impres- 
 sion persists that the Industrial Workers is a violent 
 organization. Its violence consists in shocking a com- 
 munity into a consciousness of industrial conditions 
 and workers into a conscious need of rebellion against 
 exploitation. As it teaches the workers to regard all 
 the wealth they create as their own, it reminds them 
 that physical force represented by the police and the 
 army is the monopoly of capital and that labor cannot 
 win out in a contest of force against that array; that 
 labor's power to win lies in its ability to stand together 
 and withhold service. 
 
 The other event which brought the question of 
 violence before the country involved the American 
 Federation. The McNamara brothers, officers of the 
 Bridge and Structural Iron Workers' Union, affiliated 
 with the American Federation of Labor, pleaded guilty 
 to the charge of dynamiting the Times Building in 
 Los Angeles and the Llewellyn Iron Works, which 
 resulted in the former case in the death of twenty-one 
 men. 
 
 So implicitly, with rare exceptions, had union men 
 believed in the innocence of the brothers, so enthu3ias- 
 tically had they contributed thousands of dollars to 
 their defence and conducted at great personal sacrifice 
 a long campaign in behalf of their trial, that the con- 
 fession fell with the stunning force of a well-directed 
 
 I, 
 
 I 
 
 VIOLENCE 
 
 191 
 
 blow. The enemies of the unions, mounting to victory 
 sent their challenge to the unions through the press. 
 In substance they said: The confession of these men 
 whom you call brothers discredits your movement 
 and involves your officials in a general suspicion that 
 they stand for violence, a charge they have been in 
 the habit of repudiating; continue at your peril your 
 refusal to join with law abiding citizens (including the 
 representatives of the National Erectors' Association, 
 the National Manufacturers' Association) to drag-net 
 the unions and clean out the criminals ! 
 
 The challenge was ruthlessly pressed on individual 
 labor men by enterprising reporters before they had 
 recovered from the shock of the disclosure that the 
 men were guilty. Individual union men answered 
 variously, depending on their temper and strength of 
 their convictions. But two official statements issued by 
 the American Federation were representative of 
 the attitude of the membership. The one from the 
 headquarters in Washington was in part as follows : 
 
 Organized labor of America has no desire to condone 
 the crimes of the McNamaras . . . and yet it is an awful 
 commentary upon existing conditions when any one man, 
 among all the millions of workers, can bring himself to 
 the frame of mind that the only means to secure justice 
 for labor is in violence, outrage, and murder. It is cruelly 
 unjust to hold the men of the labor movement either 
 legally or morally responsible for the crime of an in- 
 dividual member. No such moral code or legal responsi- 
 bility is placed upon any other association of men in our 
 country . , .^ 
 
192 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 i 
 
 ■(t 
 
 i 
 
 ; 
 
 Another statement repudiating the eflFort to saddle 
 the acts of individuals on the whole body of organized 
 labor was issued from a conference of officers of inter- 
 national unions whose headquarters were situated 
 in Indianapolis, the home also of the Bridge and 
 Structural Iron Workers. " The conference . . . 
 takes this opportunity to express its condemnation of 
 crime and violence whether developing in trade unions, 
 in commercial enterprises or in the conduct of daily 
 newspapers. There can be no distinction as to quality 
 of participants in crime, no palliation for crime, no 
 excuse for crime; and the present enlargement on a 
 particular crime, committed by a member of a trade 
 union, one among millions of organized wage earn- 
 ers, or by an officer of a trade union, one among 
 thousands of such officers, smacks much of an attempt 
 to cover up crime in other quarters and to enlarge 
 the opportunity for criminals in high places. . . . 
 Every hostile newspaper, and that means every 
 newspaper controlled by the interests, and there 
 are many of them, every officer of the hostile 
 associations, every opponent of trade unions has gone 
 into ecstasy of enthusiasm in denunciation of trade 
 unions. Npt because of the crime to which the Mc- 
 Namaras pleaded guilty but because opportunity has 
 been afforded to strike another blow at the organized 
 wage earners; another avenue has been presented 
 through which to arouse suspicion and dissension in 
 their ranks. . . . From the standpoint of law and hu- 
 
 VIOLENCE 
 
 193 
 
 manity the McNamaras are guilty of a terrible and 
 revolting crime . . . and from a moral standpoint 
 the proprietor of the Los Angeles Times is just as 
 guilty as the McNamaras, and in his guilt he is joined 
 by those representatives of the anti-union associations 
 who inflame the minds of the wage earners, who force 
 on them the one idea of the hopelessness of their strug- 
 gle and who indulge in legalized crimes in order that 
 profit may thrive and greed may be nurtured. . . ." 
 The Los Angeles Times is described as an " engine of 
 destruction more powerful when damnably used than 
 dynamite bombs or nitro-glycerine." ^ 
 
 The unions were pursued with ill-concealed glee by 
 attorneys, detectives, and the hostile press. The effect 
 of the pursuit was to throw the unions back on con- 
 trasts between the movement under their direction 
 and the management of industry. Under the latter 
 all-pervading influence, the killing of the 21 men in 
 The Times explosion is called murder, although it was 
 clear that the intention of the perpetrator was to de- 
 stroy the building and not the men. It was not called 
 murder when 147 girls were burned to death because 
 the proprietors of the factory in which they were 
 burned had their intention fixed on profits and disre- 
 garded on that account the ordinary precautions 
 against the destruction of life. The killing of 21 men 
 is called the " crime of the century " and the killing 
 each year of 20,000 workers in industry is called a 
 " deplorable loss of life." 
 
il 
 
 K 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 194 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 VIOLENCE 
 
 195 
 
 I 
 
 ( 
 
 I 
 
 « 
 
 The National Erectors* Association had waged a 
 relentless war against the Bridge and Structural Iron 
 Workers* Union, which existed for the purpose of 
 making life more bearable in an industry where the 
 life of the workers on an average does not extend 
 over thirty-five years; where men are killed at the 
 rate of twenty a week ; and where six times as many 
 are injured. For the labor which the men gave and 
 the risks which they took they were paid $2.40 for ten 
 hours* work before the union gained its control and 
 reduced the hours to eight and increased the wage 
 in districts to $4.50. Shorter hours and better wages 
 are themselves protection against the dangers which 
 beset the erection of steel buildings and bridges. Men 
 who are not over-exhausted from long hours and enjoy 
 good living conditions are better prepared than others 
 to meet the dangers. There are no records kept of men 
 killed on non-union as compared with union jobs, 
 but one investigation was made by John Mitchell which 
 the unions cite as a fair illustration of union protec- 
 tion. Out of the three bridges built across the East 
 River from Manhattan to Brooklyn and Queens two 
 were built under union regulations and one without 
 union interference. In the building of the two union 
 bridges six men only lost their lives while fifty-five 
 men were killed in the building of the non-union 
 bridge. 
 
 But the sort of protection which the iron workers 
 demanded threatened dividends. To protect themselves 
 
 against coercion the steel constructing companies 
 organized the National Erectors' Association, pledged 
 to destroy that " un-American ** institution, the union 
 shop. This association in course of time drove the 
 union officers to despair in their effort to establish or 
 to hold the union shop and its regulations. The deeds 
 to which the McNamaras confessed were born of their 
 desperation. Having driven the union to desperation 
 the association of erectors used the confession to 
 create a public impression that the violence of these 
 men and the union was typical of the policy of the 
 union movement generally. It was with consummate 
 effrontery that they turned to the public and to union 
 men requesting their help in clearing the country of 
 the violence perpetrated by union officers. They did 
 not lessen the insult by explaining that they proposed 
 this campaign against the union for their own good. 
 If to accomplish their end it became necessary to wreck 
 the whole union movement (and detectives and sec- 
 tions of the press intimated that it would be) they 
 were prepared to help all good unionists to make that 
 sacrifice. 
 
 When the McNamaras were arrested evidence of 
 complicity of other union officials was in the hands 
 of the Erectors* Association. During the trial of these 
 other officials, thirty-eight altogether, it developed that 
 detectives for the Association had been employed for 
 six years in gathering evidence before making an 
 arrest. They left no doubt in the mind of any one that 
 
I! 
 
 196 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 VIOLENCE 
 
 197 
 
 F'i 
 
 they had expected to indict officials of the American 
 Federation and involve other unions besides the Struc- 
 tural Iron Workers. They expected to dissolve not one 
 union of a few thousand workers but to disorganize 
 a movement including two million workers. 
 
 As the union men came to believe that the hunt was 
 less for the suppression of violence than for the sup- 
 pression of the union movement the note of hesitancy 
 and apology expressed by many union men turned to 
 resentment. They had been convinced before the con- 
 fession of the McNamaras that their arrest was " a 
 frame-up " ; they now understood for the first time the 
 ground for their suspicion. 
 
 In the Amalgamated Journal of Iron, Steel and 
 Tin Workers Judson O'Neil remarked, " The labor 
 movement has nothing to apologize for in this 
 case. Under like circumstances we shall in all proba- 
 bility do the same thing . . . when the workers real- 
 ize that violence is also a monopoly of big business 
 . . . there will be a different tale to tell." ' 
 
 Anton Johannsen, representing the Building Trades 
 Council of California, speaking in behalf of the 
 officials on trial said: 
 
 They found that in that industry (steel) every single 
 labor union had been completely destroyed and annihil- 
 ated with but one exception, the Bridge and Structural 
 Iron Workers' Union. You can draw your own inference, 
 but every union was destroyed by the steel trust and all 
 those men who had lost their organization worked twelve 
 
 5; 
 
 ( 
 
 il 
 
 hours a day for $409 a year as the average wage. We 
 have a Congressional report to back us up as to the facts. 
 What are the facts in connection with the Iron Workers' 
 International Union? In seven years during the ad- 
 ministration of John J. McNamara the union increased 
 its membership from 5,000 to nearly 14,000 members. 
 They established an eight-hour day from the Atlantic to 
 the Pacific, from Texas to the Canadian line, and they 
 established a wage scale of $4.30 as compared with $2.20 
 .... I do not know, but I suppose that the McNamaras 
 became convinced that no amount of pleading, no amount 
 of argument, no amount of logic, no amount of Christian- 
 ity, no amount of politics, would convince the steel trust 
 that they could give eight hours and give them living 
 wages. Labor would have to organize. The steel trust 
 had what they called the National Erectors' Association, 
 one of the tributaries of the steel trust, and the National 
 Erectors 'Association had what they called the American 
 Bridge Company, another tributary of the steel trust. 
 . . . How long do they expect those 260,000 men and 
 boys to work in the steel industry for $409 a year, 
 twelve hours a day, without becoming imbued with 
 animosity and despair? How do they expect it? If a 
 man says to me McNamara should be condemned my 
 reply is : All right, we will condemn the McNamaras ; we 
 will also condemn the Carnegies. If a man says to me 
 that the Iron Workers' Union should be condemned I 
 say. All right; we will also condemn the steel trust. If 
 they say, We want light, we want justice; all right, light 
 up the iron workers, light up the steel trust, light up 
 labor and light up capital. Put on the searchlight for both 
 parties and we are willing that our sins shall be com- 
 pared with their sins. * 
 
 Any one who interprets these answers of labor as 
 arguments in favor of violence fails to understand 
 
198 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 VIOLENCE 
 
 199 
 
 
 the force of the reason or impulse which binds men 
 together in unions. The conviction of union men is 
 that violence does not meet the occasion, not that the 
 occasion does not justify it. The occasion develops 
 violence and unions stand by members who have been 
 goaded by conditions to commit violence in protection 
 of their purpose which is opposition to violence in 
 industry. Violence is inconsistent with organization; 
 it is its antithesis, and no people know this so well as 
 those whose lives are spent in attaining organization. 
 
 The McNamara incident failed to convict the labor 
 movement of violence. It served rather to bring out 
 in relief the eflFort of the unions to protect life against 
 the wanton disregard for life which characterizes the 
 promoters of American industry. 
 
 In the chapter on " Strikes and Violence " it is 
 shown that the violence of unarmed strikers pales into 
 sickly effort before the authorized brutality of a well- 
 armed police force or militia. While society condones 
 violence in industry and meets opposition to that vio- 
 lence with armed interference it will inevitably reap 
 an occasional harvest of labor violence. As it under- 
 takes to quell the opposition with its official force it 
 places the labor unions in the lead in the fight against 
 violence. The violence of the police in the Shirt 
 Waist Strike in New York City advertised the thought 
 of organization of women workers throughout the 
 country and even in Europe, as the peaceful efforts 
 of union officials had failed to do. And in the same 
 
 way the violence of the militia in the Lawrence strike 
 carried the suggestion of rebellion to many thousand 
 unskilled and apathetic workers. The violence of 
 state officers quickens public interest and stimulates 
 imagination. The community lines up and rebellious 
 labor makes new friends and new recruits. While 
 individuals surrender reason to the consuming forces 
 of passion their militant acts in defence of a human 
 cause kindle thought among the masses of men. 
 
STRIKES AND VIOLENCE 
 
 201 
 
 Ji 
 
 CHAPTER XV 
 STRIKES AND VIOLENCE 
 
 Value of legal rights to picket — Union position in regard to vio- 
 lence in strikes — Authorized methods— Conflicting elements * 
 on picket field — Paterson strike — Mass picketing — Lawrence 
 strike — Outside testimony in regard to violence — ^Failure of 
 law to protect picketing in New York — Order to regard 
 pickets as vagrants — Story of Calumet strike — Strike of 
 Colorado Miners — Citizens' alliances. 
 
 The state laws generally recognize that strikers 
 have a right to approach fellow workers and to peace- 
 fully persuade them to refrain from working. Bi;t 
 the right vouchsafed a picket to walk up and down' 
 in front of a work-shop where the strike occurred, to 
 speak to men and women on their way to work in the 
 shop and to dissuade them if possible from entering, 
 is not a particular right of a picket but of any man or 
 woman. The withholding of such a right would be a 
 clear case of discrimination against strikers. 
 
 The value of the right as a practical concession is 
 constantly in review. The question centers around 
 whether the speaking of a picket to others or his pres- 
 ence in the vicinity causes disturbance. Also questions 
 of disturbance are questions of degree. And as an 
 actual fact the simplest form of picketing is a dis- 
 turbance. A striker, by speaking to a man whose in- 
 
 200 
 
 tention is fixed on working, about the desire of others 
 that he should discontinue his intention, disturbs the 
 man and his would-be-employer. The purposes of the 
 picket and of the other two are opposed. If the picket 
 is effective, if he actually pickets, he must persist in 
 spite of the annoyance. A vigilant police officer or a 
 soldier, stationed in the strike field to maintain order 
 and interpreting the order literally and in the interest 
 of the struck plant, will arrest any active picket on the 
 ground of annoyance. On the same ground he will 
 be sentenced by a magistrate or held by military com- 
 * mand for disorderly conduct. Such are the common 
 interpretations of peaceful picketing. Innumerable 
 records of such rulings may be found in magistrates' 
 
 courts. 
 
 Labor unions do not claim that strikers are never 
 disturbers of the peace. But unions of all affiliations 
 linsist that: (i) rioting and violence are good for the 
 cause of the employer and bad for the cause of the 
 strikers directly concerned except in certain aggra- 
 vated cases; (2) that the iijiportation of thugs and pro- 
 fessional strike-breakers into strike zones precipitates 
 riots; (3) that the presence of militia is not conducive 
 to -order but to violence; (4) that "striker" and 
 " rioter " are synonymous terms to the average judge. 
 
 The usual instructions given by union officers to 
 strikers is to picket with hands in pockets, to walk 
 singly or in twos, to watch closely for every possible 
 strike-breaker, and to persuade, to persist in persuad- 
 
 
 
202 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 STRIKES AND VIOLENCE 
 
 203 
 
 ¥^' 
 
 i! 
 
 Is-. J 
 
 it 
 li 
 
 ing them by all peaceful means, that is, by means of 
 speech only, to forego their intention of taking 
 strikers* jobs. 
 
 If the strike occurs in the city, the pickets on reach- 
 ing their field of activity find applicants for the struck 
 jobs who had not known that a strike was on; they 
 find others who are not unionists but as scornful of 
 scabbing as they are ; they find others who are curious 
 to hear the pickets* story; then they find the other 
 sort who resent the attitude of all strikers and are 
 interested only in their personal relation with the em- 
 ployer and the opportunity which he holds out for 
 work. In all strikes the applicants for the struck job 
 vary from those who are sympathetic with strikers and 
 susceptible to persuasion to those who are antagonistic. 
 
 It is the object of the pickets to reach all of these 
 men before they are reached by the employer. It is 
 the object of the employer to reach all of the men be- 
 fore they are reached by the pickets. If the field is 
 clear between the applicants for work and the pickets 
 no question of peaceful picketing arises. There is no 
 one there to draw the fine distinctions as to what con- 
 stitutes disturbance in picketing; and a strike-breaker, 
 if alone with a picket, while he may have no ground 
 for fear of physical harm, will not have the moral 
 courage to face alone the odium of scabbing. 
 
 But picketing under such circumstances seldom hap- 
 pens or when it does is of short duration. The moment 
 a strike occurs and before picketing actually begins 
 
 employers usually inform the police that a strike is 
 on, that trouble is expected and that their protection 
 is needed. The police department answers the call 
 on the assumption that strikers are rioters. Or if a 
 strike is in a rural district, the smallest disturbance 
 is used as an excuse for calling in the militia, who like 
 the police answer the call with a well-settled under- 
 standing that it is the strikers who need to be sup- 
 pressed. To keep up an official guard it is important 
 that the public be reassured that violence is active or 
 imminent. It is important that applicants for work 
 be reassured that the pickets are their enemies lying 
 in wait to attack and that the employers are their pro- 
 tectors and friends. The employers* private detectives 
 and guards, who are usually professional strike-break- 
 ers, intensify the situation as they aggravate the pickets 
 and induce riots and disorder. 
 
 These private guards, together with the police or 
 the militia, are on hand ostensibly to keep order. But 
 they line up together on the assumption that the pick- 
 ets are disturbers of law and order and the employer 
 is the law-abiding factor in the situation. The picket 
 field thus divided seethes with suggestion of violence, 
 with official and unofficial provocation. 
 
 A strike occurred in the silk mills of Paterson, New 
 Jersey, where picketing is legal. The New York 
 Globe in an editorial pointed out that local newspapers, 
 although bitterly opposed to the strike, were brought 
 to comment : " The strike has had one remarkable 
 
204 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ii 
 
 ♦.; 
 
 
 r >- 
 
 b' 
 
 % 
 
 '^§ 
 
 feature which the people of Paterson will never forget. 
 It is that although many thousand strikers stayed away 
 from the mill for five months, not only was there prac- 
 tically no violence but the rank and file of the strikers 
 behaved themselves during a trying time in a manner 
 that entitled them to admiration." The Press believes 
 that " this phase of the great strike of 1913 stands 
 without a parallel in this or any other country." 
 Together with this testimony of a paper unfriendly to 
 the strikers it is enlightening to remember that 1,200 
 pickets were arrested and 300 fined or sentenced. The 
 Globe in the same editorial explained why well- 
 behaved strikers were arrested by the wholesale. 
 
 Paterson is afflicted with anarchistic administration 
 officers and with a judge and a public prosecutor who 
 recall Jeffreys and his hanging assistant. These stupid 
 and wicked persons when the strike began thought to 
 suppress it by breaking up peaceable meetings and pre- 
 venting free speech and making arbitrary arrests. The 
 result has been the struggle has lasted five months and 
 the estimated cost to the city is $5,000,000. As often 
 as it was about to collapse the public authorities started 
 it up again. ... Is it strange that the workers of Pater- 
 son are bitter at heart? Lawlessness does not pay. It 
 does not pay labor organizations as they have discovered 
 and hence the advice of Haywood to his pickets, " Keep 
 your hands in your pockets." . . .^ 
 
 The popular belief is that the Industrial Workers in- 
 cite pickets to commit violence. The opposite is true. 
 The mass picketing introduced and advocated by them 
 
 STRIKES AND VIOLENCE 
 
 205 
 
 I 
 
 requires that the strikers keep up a continuous line of 
 march around the struck plant and make their good 
 spirits, their songs and faith in each other an irresist- 
 ible appeal to all workers. Mass picketing as it was 
 conducted in the memorable strikes of the Industrial 
 Workers of 1912 and 1913 were demonstrations 
 which served as contrasts; contrasts between the 
 strength of workers joined together in their common 
 purpose and the helplessness of capital without labor 
 or the helplessness of an employer in efforts to coerce 
 workers into terms of work dictated by him. 
 
 The first popular appreciation of mass picketing 
 under the direction of the Industrial Workers occurred 
 in the strike of the mill workers in Lawrence, Massa- 
 chusetts. The strike tied up the mills completely. 
 The cheerful, gay line of pickets around the mills gave 
 certain promise of a continued shut down, a more cer- 
 tain promise than violence or bad spirit could have 
 done. It was clear if the strike was to be broken 
 that spirits must be dampened. A fire hose was used 
 for the purpose. A great stream of cold water on 
 a day in January was poured on a mass of pickets, 
 drenching their clothes and chilling their bodies. The 
 purpose was attained. The pickets angrily resented 
 the attack and stgned the factory. Here was the 
 excuse needed for calling in the militia and swearing 
 in special detectives, for the protection of the property 
 of the mill owners which they could prove had been 
 attacked. On their arrival the insults oflFered the 
 
2o6 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 STRIKES AND VIOLENCE 
 
 207 
 
 pickets increased. Every known method used to 
 annoy pickets was adopted. The aggressors were not 
 arrested but the strikers and their friends were ar- 
 rested, beaten, and shot. 
 
 Picketing is legal in New York, but the law has 
 failed to protect countless numbers of law-abiding 
 pickets. The women's strikes in the clothing trades 
 offer abundant evidence. If a woman picket is seen 
 by a representative of a struck factory or by a repre- 
 sentative of the police court to speak to another 
 woman on her way to or from the factory and if she 
 is successful in dissuading the woman from working, 
 the picket is spotted. If she continues her effective 
 work she finds herself the center of a disturbance 
 worked up by the thugs hanging around the factory 
 doors or she is crowded on the sidewalk and told to 
 her surprise that she is blocking the traffic or she is 
 insulted by the police. When she resists these ag- 
 gressions she is arrested. In court, the word of the 
 police officer is invariably taken against her word and 
 she is fined or given a workhouse sentence. 
 
 During the clothing strike of 1913, the Mayor of 
 New York City issued an order on the request of 
 clothing manufacturers and certain disgruntled union 
 officials, to regard pickets on duty around the fac- 
 tories as vagrants. This order was issued in the first 
 instance to apply to the clothing strikers only, but it 
 happened that there was another strike in progress 
 of straw-hat makers in the same neighborhood. At 
 
 the instigation of the manufacturers the Mayor ex- 
 tended the order to apply to all pickets of all trades in 
 the vicinity. The Mayor took the position that the in- 
 terests of the manufacturers and the public were of 
 primary importance. The legal rights of the workers 
 were relegated to protest meetings while the decision 
 broke the strikes. 
 
 While labor unions of whatever affiliation declare 
 that violence on the part of pickets is bad strike tactics 
 there is not an officer who does not realize that men 
 will not long submit to insults and other provocations 
 planned by the opposition without retaliation. All 
 strikers, in time, refuse to submit to the degrading 
 insults of government officials or agents of employers. 
 The miners in the strike in West Virginia met the 
 violence of the operators' agents and the agents of the 
 state with armed resistance. The war advertised the 
 strike, the causes which led up to the strike, and the 
 official disregard of constitutional rights. The story 
 was laid before Congress and a congressional inves- 
 tigation placed the responsibility on the mine owners 
 and the state officials. The West Virginia miners 
 believe to-day that violence in return for violence paid. 
 
 There was no effort to conceal the partiality of state 
 officers of Michigan for mine owners during the strike 
 of the Calumet miners. Before the strike reached the 
 tense period which followed a Christmas eve celebra- 
 tion and before the deportation and shooting of the 
 president of the miners' union the story of the strike 
 
 li t 
 
208 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 STRIKES AND VIOLENCE 
 
 209 
 
 t\ 
 
 I i 
 
 ! 
 
 was told as follows by John Walker of the United 
 Mine Workers' Union: 
 
 Some time before coming out on strike, these men had 
 organized and became members of the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners. They had been working a so-called ten- 
 hour day. They were more than an average of eleven 
 hours per day underground. Their wages would not 
 average $2.20 per day. I have seen their statements and 
 made a personal investigation of the matter. As low as 
 27 cents per shift has been paid for nine shifts work; 
 another got $1.61 per shift for nineteen shifts work. 
 Some received as high as $3.00 per day. 
 
 And to cap it all, the companies decided to make the 
 miners handle the drilling machine single (they weigh 
 over 200 pounds) which had formerly been handled 
 double. When a person knows what it means drilling 
 hard rock, with a machine of that type, operated by 
 compressed air, sometimes on a staging up in a slope 
 amid dangerous roof and hanging rock, with not one 
 breath of air except the exhausts from the machine, the 
 light just a small flicker in the dark, you can understand 
 why they revolt. 
 
 The men held meetings, decided to request recognition 
 of their union, an eight-hour working day, a minimum 
 wage of $3.00 for underground men, and a proportionate 
 increase for those working above ground and that two 
 men be allowed to work on the machines as formerly. 
 
 They requested a joint conference with representatives 
 of the company to try to come to an agreement on these 
 questions. Their requests were met with scorn and con- 
 tempt, and a decision to strike followed. At first the 
 company refused to take the situation seriously, stating 
 that the strike would collapse before the end of a week; 
 that they had ruled those men for fifty years and had 
 never recognized a union or treated with their men in that 
 
 way; that they had always done what pleased them and 
 that they proposed to continue to do so. 
 
 Since the companies have realized that the men are in 
 earnest they have tried every means known to the most 
 vicious, heartless, and conscienceless slave-driving cor- 
 poration to break the strike, but so far have failed utterly. 
 The Governor sent in the militia. The Sheriff gave his 
 office to the Waddell-Mahon strong-arm gunmen, im- 
 ported from the slum districts of New York and other 
 large cities. 
 
 The press has maliciously slandered and deliberately 
 lied about the miners' cause, the miners, and their rep- 
 resentatives. The militiamen have driven their horses 
 on top of peaceful citizens on the sidewalks, beaten 
 up and intimidated the miners in every way known to 
 a professional strike-breaker in an effort to discourage 
 or scare them into going back to work as slaves to the 
 copper mine owners. In fact, Gen. Abbey, in com- 
 mand of the troops, only differs from Chief Strike- 
 Breaker Farley in that his work is done in a govern- 
 ment uniform, in the name of the state, and he is 
 paid direct out of the people's money for his service. 
 He is even more able, in my judgment, in using the 
 militia as scab herders, strike-breakers, and black-leg 
 protectors . . . 
 
 They have shot people in the back, browbeaten men 
 and boys, insulted women and girls, and, after filling up on 
 beer and whiskey sent them by the mine owners, swag- 
 gered up and down the streets with their big guns 
 and sabres, a disgrace to the rottenest government on 
 earth, let alone ours; a standing menace to peace and 
 decency. The imported Waddell-Mahon man-killers 
 have murdered two men in cold blood, the most cowardly 
 and wantonly brutal and utterly unwarranted butchery 
 I ever had any knowledge of. They seriously wounded 
 two others^ powder-burnt the face of a baby and shot 
 a bullet through its clothes, while it was being held in 
 
2IO 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 STRIKES AND VIOLENCE 
 
 211 
 
 V 
 
 the arms of its terror-stricken mother, while three other 
 little tots were crouched around her knees. These 
 people were in their own home, engaged in taking 
 their evening meal, when the outrages were committed. 
 Hundreds of others have been insulted and beaten up 
 by these gutter ruffians and the militia has always been 
 on the scene to encourage them in their devilish work. 
 Notwithstanding all these things, the men are stand- 
 ing as firm as the day they came out, as solid as a 
 stone wall, determined to win, no matter how long it 
 takes or at what cost. They are making a wonderful 
 fight. The copper barons have heretofore succeeded 
 in keeping practically all other organizations from being 
 established here. • 
 
 When miners go on strike they know that the state 
 militia will be used against them. Their choice in 
 West Virginia, Michigan, and Colorado in 1913 and 
 19 14 was between unconditional surrender or resisting 
 with arms. In West Virginia they used arms and 
 made substantial gains in union recognition. In 
 Michigan, unarmed, they surrendered. In Colo- 
 rado they used arms. At the time of writing there 
 is a truce. There was no chance for a judicious 
 consideration as to whether or not violence would pay 
 in the strike of the Colorado miners, called in Sep- 
 tember, 1913. The national union, the United Mine 
 Workers, had tried out all legal and peaceful methods 
 which had been followed in other coal fields for 
 settling terms of work. But Colorado miners 
 who attempted to bring organization into their indus- 
 try were rewarded with discharge or discrimination. 
 
 The efforts of the miners to secure state pro- 
 tection against some of the most flagrant abuses 
 were equally impotent. Five of the demands out of 
 the seven which they made before they struck were 
 embodied in state laws. But those laws like all others 
 which were contrary to the interest of the coal cor- 
 porations were still-born. It was the law of the 
 corporations which prevailed in Colorado coal fields, 
 and the administrators of that law were state officials 
 and mine superintendents. Such charges against the 
 state and the corporations the miners had been re- 
 iterating for years to no purpose. 
 
 The officials of the United Mine Workers knew the 
 bitterness and the resentment which existed among 
 the miners in Colorado. They knew that the men had 
 lost faith in petitions and peaceful persuasion. They 
 knew that the miners in the northern and southern 
 coal fields would rather fight and face death than live 
 longer enduring the arrogance, insults, and successive 
 defeats meted out to them by the state and private 
 representatives of the corporations owning the mines. 
 Knowing the temper of the Colorado men, the national 
 union hesitated before calling a strike, but having ex- 
 hausted all its resources for obtaining a peaceful 
 settlement, it was forced to yield to the demand 
 of the men that a strike be called, as it was the men 
 and not the officers who were the victims of conditions 
 which the operators imposed. 
 
 There was occasional violence in the early months 
 
n 
 
 I I 
 
 212 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 of the strike; notably the deportation of the miners' 
 Mother Jones and her detention without civil 
 authority, without permitting habeas corpus pro- 
 ceedings. But such incidents were becoming a com- 
 monplace in times of strikes and it failed to arouse the 
 country. It was not until April when the miners 
 opened war against the anarchy of the state officials 
 and the violence of private guards that the attention 
 of the country became fixed on Colorado, its miners, 
 its operators, and its state officials. 
 
 In West Virginia, a Congressional Commission in- 
 quired into the abuse of constitutional rights after the 
 crisis in the strike had been reached. In Colorado, a 
 Congressional Commission discovered before warfare 
 commenced that the miners' charges of oppression as 
 well as of anarchy were true. But the light gained 
 by the Commission reached only those already inter- 
 ested in the struggle. The testimony before that com- 
 mission received national attention only after the 
 miners assumed their position of aggression. Every- 
 thing that had happened as well as what was happening 
 in Colorado became important from that time. It at 
 last became clear to the reading public that the state 
 had deputized mine guards in the hire of the operators 
 to act as part of the state militia in defending the 
 mine owners, their strike breakers, and their property, 
 and had treated the miners, their children, and their 
 friends with wanton cruelty. It became known gen- 
 erally that these mine guards had been recruited from 
 
 STRIKES AND VIOLENCE 
 
 213 
 
 criminal gangs who hired out to do murder for 
 the coal operators in West Virginia and the owners 
 of the copper fields in Michigan. A roster of 
 one of the troops used in Colorado showed that 
 126 of the 168 militiamen were in the employ of 
 the coal companies. It was the superior resistance 
 which the miners of Colorado were able to show 
 to the resistance of the miners in the other coal 
 fields which aroused the country and advertised the 
 methods which are used by the mining companies in 
 their opposition to the organization of the workers. 
 It was not until the miners changed their tactics from 
 asking to fighting and successfully fighting the militia 
 of Colorado that the country understood. Although 
 the Federal troops have forced a truce at the time of 
 writing it is clear to every one that peace will not 
 return to Colorado until the miners are free to or- 
 ganize and the control of the state has passed from 
 the hands of coal operators. 
 
 The formation of citizens' alliances in times of 
 strikes is a certain promise of lawlessness and outrage. 
 In the name of citizenship these alliances deport 
 strikers, and enter homes of strikers without a war- 
 rant. They have beaten, clubbed, shot strikers in the 
 same spirit that other alliances of the same sort have 
 burnt negroes. 
 
 A suggestion of the Los Angeles Times, the paper 
 dedicated to the task of ridding the country of " un- 
 sirable" labor unions, was reported as follows to a 
 
 M 
 
214 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 "i 
 
 'il- 'I 
 
 convention of the American Federation : " And soon, 
 it has begun to happen already, the plain citizens 
 of every country will form a combine. Its object 
 will be the suppression of sedition and anarchy in 
 the persons of the professional agitators. Theirs 
 will be a big, powerful, effective but very unostenta- 
 tious revolt. It will work quickly, surely, silently. 
 The first thing the Plain Citizen Combine will 
 accomplish is the quiet removal of these gentle- 
 men. They won't be blown up; they will just 
 quietly disappear from human ken. There will 
 be a little inquiry at first but it will die down ever so 
 quickly, for of all people in the world the pro- 
 fessional agitator depends entirely upon his presence 
 and his glib tongue to maintain any sort of interest or 
 influence in his followers. His impassioned rhetoric 
 is his only asset." * These " Plain Citizen Combines " 
 do not always work so silently as the Times con- 
 templated. In Calumet they did not have to ; the con- 
 trolling sentiment of Calumet stood back of the pat- 
 riotic citizens who assaulted, shot, and deported the 
 president of the miners' union on strike when he re- 
 fused to do their bidding. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI 
 SABOTAGE 
 
 Definitions— Not new idea— Not confined to strikes or labor 
 union action— In stage of advocacy— Defense of revolution- 
 ists — Destruction stupid. 
 
 In the introduction to a little book by Emile Pouget 
 on " Sabotage " Arturo Giovannitti, a leading spokes- 
 man of the Industrial Workers, defines sabotage as: 
 (i) " Any conscious and willful act on the part of one 
 or more workers intended to slacken and reduce the 
 output of production in the industrial field, or to 
 restrict trade and reduce the profits in the commercial 
 field, in order to secure from their employers better 
 conditions or to enforce those promised or maintain 
 those already prevailing, when no other way of redress 
 is open; (2) Any skillful operation on the machinery 
 of production intended not to destroy it or permanently 
 render it defective but only to temporarily disable it 
 and to put it out of running condition in order to 
 make impossible the work of scabs and thus to secure 
 the complete and real stoppage of work during a 
 strike." ^ 
 
 The qualifying statements in regard to destruction 
 are not essential parts of the definition of the word, 
 but they are essential to an understanding of the 
 
 915 
 
 .,;2£. 
 
■F 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 2i6 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 policy of the organization which advocates the use 
 of sabotage as a method. Those qualifying state- 
 ments are insisted upon in every case and by all the 
 leaders. Doctor James Warbasse, who is empowered 
 to speak for the Industrial Workers, in his definition 
 recognizes that the qualifications have to do with the 
 practice rather than the definition. In a pamphlet 
 reprinted from the New York Call his definition in- 
 cludes a statement of the theoretical basis for its use: 
 
 Sabotage in its broad sense as understood and applied 
 in the modern industrial movement is the cooperative 
 application by workers of measures for the retardation 
 of the profit-making business of employers, having as 
 Its objects the securing of concessions from the latter 
 m the interests of the former as a class ; the demonstra- 
 tion of the power and the indispensability of the workers 
 and the bringing about ultimately of a better society. 
 There exists in the public mind an erroneous notion 
 that sabotage means the destruction of property by 
 violence practised by striking workers with no further 
 object than that of coercing employers into granting 
 workers certain immediate demands. While the violent 
 destruction of property is sometimes a feature of sab- 
 otage, it is exceptional but by no means characteristic. 
 The term is applied also to any form of curtailment 
 of output or destruction of property in the interest of 
 business, provided it is practised by one class at the ex- 
 pense of a second class. The workers thus speak of the 
 depredations of capital as sabotage. Literally the term 
 means to move slowly with heavy feet. Destruction 
 of property or reduction of output practised by an 
 individual for his personal ends is not to be dignified 
 by being called sabotage. It is possible that industrial 
 
 SABOTAGE 
 
 217 
 
 terminology will not long sanction the use of the word 
 when applied to the petty interests of craft unions. 
 Sabotage is a war measure. In so far as war is unethical 
 sabotage is unethical. It presupposes the existence of a 
 conflict between the capitalist class and the working class.^ 
 
 Sabotage itself is no new thing. What is new is 
 the proposition to develop the spontaneous acts of 
 individual workers in time of labor disputes into a 
 policy of action, under the direction of labor organ- 
 izations. A striking white-goods worker won the 
 applause of her sister strikers when she announced 
 that she had spent the day in a struck factory sewing 
 the left legs of uiidfildrawers to left legs and right 
 legs to right. She had not been directed to do this 
 by her union and she would have been surprised to 
 hear that her action had a name and back of its name 
 was a philosophy. She did spontaneously what many 
 strikers before her had done and on their own impulse. 
 Her act was in its nature a prank which '' served 
 the boss right." As he had said he liked the work 
 of unskilled girls she declared it was well to give him 
 a little more of it. The very nature of strikes invites 
 such action. If such unofficial acts had been recorded 
 there would doubtless be ample opportunity for judg- 
 ment as to their value as a labor measure. 
 
 The spirit of sabotage is not confined to the present, 
 or to times of strike, nor to labor union action, as 
 has been pointed out. When an individual worker 
 is aggrieved over the lack of relation between the 
 
 I 
 
 i!i 
 
 I 
 
Hdz 
 
 
 ■M 
 
 ii 
 
 2i8 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 remuneration for a job and the amount or kind of 
 labor It requires of him, it is not uncommon for him 
 to skimp his service as far as possible. This is the 
 spirit of sabotage disconnected with the labor union 
 and without revolutionary intent. Giovannitti says- 
 A certain simple thing which is more or less gen- 
 erally practised and thought very plain and natural, 
 as, for mstance, a negro picking less cotton when re- 
 ceivmg less grub, becomes a monstrous thing, a crime 
 and a blasphemy when it is openly advocated and ad- 
 vised.'" When workers came to generalize about 
 conditions of employment and decided or rather real- 
 ized that speeding up resulted in wage reductions and 
 when they tacitly agreed among themselves without 
 organization to " go slow " they were practising sabot- 
 age even if it did not deserve the name of a revolu- 
 tionary measure. 
 
 Pouget points out that " ca cannie " was preached 
 to workers through a pamphlet issued in 1895 which 
 declared that if labor was to be treated like a com- 
 modity in the market, labor like other commodities 
 would give poor service for poor prices. 
 
 Sabotage is no new thing. It is probably as old as 
 labor performed for others. Why is it considered 
 a menace ? Giovannitti answers : " It is simply be- 
 cause there is no danger in any act in itself when it is 
 determined by natural instinctive impulse and is quite 
 unconscious and unpremeditated, it only becomes dan- 
 gerous when it becomes the translated practical ex- 
 
 SABOTAGE 
 
 219 
 
 ! 
 
 pression of an idea even through or rather because 
 this idea has originated from the act itself." * 
 
 Sabotage as an organized method in the United 
 States is in an early stage of advocacy. Its actual 
 use according to those preaching it is negligible. 
 A speaker for the Industrial Workers " told the 
 striking silk workers in Paterson that if starva- 
 tion forced them back to the slavery and growing 
 degradation from which they had revolted, if 
 their strike were lost, if the hunger of their 
 children broke their power of resistance, they should 
 use sabotage in the mills and in the dye shops." ' 
 No workers were arrested for committing sabotage 
 nor was it known that any sabotage was com- 
 mitted in Paterson, but the advocate was arrested, 
 sentenced to hard labor in prison and fined under what 
 is known as the " Anarchy Statutes." No act resulted 
 from his speech but he was sentenced for advocating 
 destruction. He did not advocate destruction but in- 
 jury. The court made no distinction. The sabotage 
 issue before the law is at present an issue of free 
 speech. 
 
 But should sabotage extend to destruction as a 
 revolutionary measure it has its defence : " If the in- 
 struments of production rightfully belong to the 
 workers, it means that they have been pilfered from 
 them and that the capitalist class detains them in an 
 immoral way. It is legal for the bourgeois to keep 
 them in accordance to its own laws, but surely it is not 
 
 ^ 
 
^^'^. 
 
 r:' 
 
 i 
 
 111 
 
 V 
 
 r I 
 
 220 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ' ethically justifiable ' from the point of view of our 
 aforesaid comrades (the Socialists). If these instru- 
 ments of production are ours they are so as much 
 now as they will be a hundred years hence. Also 
 bemg our property we can do with it whatever we 
 best please, we can run them for our own good as 
 we surely will; but if we so choose we can also smash 
 them to pieces. It may be stupid but it is not dis- 
 honest. The fact that the burglars have them in their 
 temporary possession does not in the least impeach 
 our clear title of ownership. We are not strong 
 enough to get them back just now but we cannot 
 forego any chances of getting something out of 
 them.'* « 
 
 ^^ But the Industrial Workers consider destruction 
 " stupid '' and it is the intention to direct its use, as 
 the French syndicates have directed it through the aid 
 of the skilled workers. Their purpose is to put a 
 machine " out of commission " temporarily, to delay 
 production as a strike delays it; they propose to injure 
 the profits in materials by lowering the quality of 
 workmanship for the time being or until such time 
 as an employer will concede demands. There is no 
 ground for the assumption that the carefully planned 
 injury would have destructive effects on the worker's 
 character. His injurious or destructive act is com- 
 mitted to prevent other injury or destruction which is 
 to him far more injurious and destructive. He 
 destroys or injures a machine as an owner would 
 
 SABOTAGE 
 
 221 
 
 destroy it if its continued operation was destruc- 
 tive. 
 
 The Industrial Workers are less concerned at 
 present with the practice than they are with incul- 
 cating their conception of it. They recognize it 
 as the refinement of industrial warfare and believe 
 that its clumsy or unintelligent use would do more 
 harm to their cause than a postponement of the use 
 until the workers understand it as a weapon as they 
 now understand a strike. 
 
 4 
 
 
I 
 
 '''■) 
 
 II 
 
 
 CHAPTER XVII 
 LIMITATION OF OUTPUT 
 
 Restriction of production by capital, by labor — Labor restrictions 
 a defense against wage reductions — Speeding up and cutting 
 wage rates — Experience of Bricklayers — Turning the saving 
 from machine production to labor's account — Restrictions on 
 entrance to trades — I. W. W. opposition to restrictions on 
 labor. 
 
 Whatever may be the social results of production, 
 the original object of the promoters as well as the 
 workers is self interest. Capital withdraws from 
 wealth-creating enterprises or extends them, depend- 
 ing solely on the comparative ability of the industry 
 to create profits. When labor undertakes to regulate 
 production in the interest of wages, it is often as- 
 sumed that production is not a matter of individual 
 enterprise, but of social concern. 
 
 Capital undertakes to create, determine, and supply 
 the market for the consumption of goods on terms 
 advantageous to itself. One of its methods of in- 
 creasing the market is to decrease the cost of pro- 
 duction. The largest item in that cost is labor. The 
 greater the number of workers who compete for a 
 job, the lower will be the wage rate or the labor 
 cost. Capital restricts production and the amount 
 of labor it will buy. 
 
 LIMITATION OF OUTPUT 
 
 223 
 
 Labor finds itself at the mercy of organized capital 
 in possession of an industry, as in the manufacture of 
 steel and its products ; or at the mercy of competing 
 capital, as in the sewing trades. Through the ma- 
 nipulations of capital, new and changing groups of 
 workers with diflFerent standards and nationalities are 
 kept competing against each other, as in the textile 
 trade. For several generations labor has struggled 
 against underemployment caused by the sudden intro- 
 duction of new machinery or methods of manufacture. 
 The workers have undertaken to protect their oppor- 
 tunity to earn a living by limiting or restricting the 
 schemes of production. Critics of labor-union 
 restriction of output, point out that every yard of 
 silk unwoven which might have been woven, and 
 every ton of coal unmined, leaves the world poorer. 
 To those who do not mine coal or weave silk, this 
 observation seems self-evident. 
 
 The silk weavers or the miners have discovered 
 through experience that they are actually poorer if 
 they reach or sustain a maximum in the weaving of 
 silk or mining coal. They do not measure their loss 
 in terms of physical exhaustion, which a maximum 
 output might well demand. They measure their loss 
 just as their employers measure theirs, in dollars 
 and cents. When labor unions limit speed or main- 
 tain an average, they are acting on the common ex- 
 perience of labor that piece rates, which are left to the 
 manipulation of capital, are invariably cut. 
 
1^ 
 
 I i;: 
 
 224 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 Every well developed industry offers illustrations 
 of this practice. In the silk and cotton mills in the 
 unorganized textile centers of the country, the 
 workers have found it unsafe to hand in on pay day 
 receipt checks for more than a certain number of 
 pounds, or yards, of goods produced during the week. 
 In other words, if the total number of a worker's 
 receipt checks represents more than the prevailing 
 wage paid the class to which he belongs, he finds that 
 in the end it is to his advantage and to the advantage 
 of all the other workers to take actually less than 
 the wage he has earned. Wage earners have discov- 
 ered that capital will continue to pay, not a prevailing 
 or established rate, but the prevailing weekly wage 
 at which labor can be bought in the market. When 
 it is discovered that the best workers can make more 
 per week than the prevailing market price, the rate 
 for all is cut and the less skilled are driven to keep 
 the pace of the highest skilled. 
 
 The constant introduction of new methods as well 
 as fresh supplies of labor, give employers renewed 
 opportunities to establish ever increasing standards of 
 speed. The latest groups of workers, whose en- 
 durance is unimpaired and who still hold illusions 
 as to piece rate possibilities, are used to reset the speed. 
 The practise of cutting piece rates to the market 
 rate of wages is responsible for the union limitations 
 on speed. To meet competition capital introduced 
 methods for increasing output which, unchecked, re- 
 
 LIMITATION OF OUTPUT 
 
 225 
 
 duced classes of workers to the lowest standards of 
 living. Where competition was unchecked parasitic 
 trades resulted in which the workers of the trades 
 were dependent on workers in other trades to eke out 
 their insufficient wages; children were forced into 
 factories to produce, with the aid of a machine and 
 for a pittance, what their fathers had produced for a 
 competent wage. An over-full labor market in certain 
 industries was kept up by stimulating emigration from 
 the cheapest labor centers of the world. With this 
 fresh supply of labor it has been possible to fill rush 
 orders, and in many trades it has done away with 
 stock work which was more conducive to steady sea- 
 sons of work. Thus unemployment was increased 
 and competition among the workers was intensi- 
 fied. 
 
 The trade union limitation of apprentices in many 
 trades has regulated the periods of employment for 
 union members and protected them from the extreme 
 hardships of an unlimited supply of labor. The trade 
 union restriction on speed has held a standard for 
 union members in wages and hours. The fate of 
 unorganized labor in the steel mills is a very present 
 reminder to labor of what it may expect if it leaves 
 the management of the labor market to free competi- 
 tion. The success of many of the unions of the 
 American Federation of Labor is due to their adoption 
 of measures regulating production. It would not have 
 been possible for many of the others to have held 
 
 n 
 
 S VI 
 
 I 
 
 
 ¥ 
 
226 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 I'll 
 
 ■f 
 
 LIMITATION OF OUTPUT 
 
 227 
 
 f1. 
 
 4tt' 
 
 !l^ 
 
 'im 
 
 their organization in the field without resorting to 
 the same protection. 
 
 While conditions in industry to-day are making it 
 increasingly difficult for labor to protect itself through 
 limitations on entrance to a trade, the strength of 
 labor organizations in certain trades has made it pos- 
 sible for some of the unions to increase their wages 
 and shorten their hours without directly limiting out- 
 put. The Bricklayers are successful in holding their 
 high wage rate and their short hour day while the 
 employers are enjoying the freedom of introducing 
 new and highly developed efficiency schemes for speed- 
 ing up the worker and increasing the output, but it is 
 a question among the men whether the present ar- 
 rangement can hold indefinitely. 
 
 The experience of the Bricklayers is unusual. Most 
 of the unions enforce restrictions as far as possible, 
 and have found that with the weakening of the re- 
 strictions there followed a loss in organization power. 
 Also, with few exceptions, the unions have learned 
 that the introduction of machinery is inevitable. 
 They recognize that they can make better use of 
 their strength in concentrating efforts on turning some 
 of the saving to their advantage, than in opposing 
 its introduction. But it requires unusual strength to 
 meet the introduction of labor-saving devices and the 
 disorganization of the industry which follows. 
 
 A new machine was introduced into a branch of 
 the sewing trades where ninety per cent, of the 
 
 workers are organized. Before it was put into opera- 
 tion, the union workers insisted that a rate of pay 
 be agreed on between the employer and the operators. 
 Neither the union nor the employer could decide 
 in advance what an operator could turn out after 
 skill had been gained in running the machine. But 
 the employer fixed a rate which he decided would 
 yield a satisfactory return, and the workers agreed 
 . that this price would not decrease the general wage 
 rate. To the surprise of both, the operators on the 
 machine in a short time earned from sixty to seventy- 
 five per cent, more than the hand workers. The em- 
 ployer at the same time realized a greater profit on 
 the output of the machine workers than on the output 
 of the hand workers. In an unorganized trade, an 
 employer would have appropriated the increase or 
 applied it to a reduction in the price of the com- 
 modity, for competitive purposes, and would have 
 paid the workers the market rate of wages. But in 
 this organized trade the union (which included ninety 
 per cent, of the workers in the trade) controlled 
 the situation and the wage rate, by restricting the 
 entrance of new workers to the trade. The success 
 of the Typographical Union in saving some of the 
 advantages of labor saving machinery for the worker 
 is a too familiar story to need repetition. It indicates 
 what labor union regulation can accomplish without 
 limiting output if labor organization is sufficiently 
 Strong, but it was necessary with the printers as with 
 
 . 
 
 ) 
 
 K- 
 
 ■ .J* , 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 , if 
 
228 
 
 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 I i 
 
 It * 
 
 il 
 
 the union above mentioned that the number of workers 
 who entered the trade should be restricted. 
 
 The labor unions which maintain a limited appren- 
 ticeship and impose restrictions on the entrance of 
 workers to a trade, recognize an unlimited labor sup- 
 ply as an evil for the same reason that capital recog- 
 nizes it as desirable. If an unlimited number of 
 workers enter a trade, the seasons of work are short- 
 ened and the wages are cut by competing workers. 
 Every one suffers and standards of life disappear; 
 they eventually fall to the standard of cotton mill 
 communities where whole families must work to secure 
 the wages formerly paid to one worker. 
 
 However, the regulation of entrance to a trade, or 
 the limitation of apprentices, is not a universal labor 
 measure. The Industrial Workers of the World in 
 particular, and some locals of the American Federa- 
 tion of Labor, declare that the trade unions which 
 are restricting entrance to a trade are opposing in 
 practice as well as in theory the object of organiza- 
 tion—the unity of all labor. These unions admit the 
 effect of an over-full labor market on this trade and 
 on that, but they contend that it is the business of 
 labor to disregard trade lines; that labor only deceives 
 itself when it closes the door to a fellow worker and 
 bids him work elsewhere; that the standard it secures 
 for one group by these restrictions is bought at the 
 sacrifice of larger groups; that the real significance 
 of the labor movement is lost, and a limited aris- 
 
 LIMITATION OF OUTPUT 
 
 229 
 
 tocracy of labor is established rather than the solidarity 
 which the labor movement demands. In place of all 
 restrictions and limitations for purposes of exclusive 
 trade bargaining, they appeal to the whole mass to 
 recognize the interdependence of all industries, and 
 to adopt inclusive methods of organization to meet the 
 conditions of industrial life. 
 
 In direct opposition to all methods by labor to regu- 
 late output, there comes from capital the proposition 
 to realize through labor a productive efficiency hitherto 
 unknown. The promoters of the movement give to 
 their proposition the name " scientific management." 
 
 .1 
 
 n 
 
 <, 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
.:! 
 
 :;.■■'<!' 
 
 M' 
 
 .1 
 
 If 
 
 il 
 
 nj 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII 
 SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT 
 
 Object— Labor prefers to manage itself— The four great princi- 
 ples explained by F. W. Taylor— All familiar to labor- 
 Proposition to transfer labor knowledge to management side 
 —A scavenger— Studies workmen as machines are studied- 
 Inspiring workmen to work— Bonus and task— Ethical re- 
 quirements-New Capitalism— Disregard of wages law- 
 Union experience with bonus and stop watch— Rest and 
 fatigue schemes regarded with suspicion— New definition of 
 mitiative— Medical condemnation of rest schemes— Ability of 
 American capital to increase output— Aim of scientific man- 
 agement is goods, aim of unions is men. 
 
 Scientific management is advocated by representa- 
 tives of capital. It proposes to increase industrial 
 output by managing labor scientifically. 
 
 But organized labor does not want to be scientifi- 
 cally managed. It is not keen about being managed 
 at all. It exists, in fact, to manage itself. 
 
 Labor controversies, as carried on by the American 
 Federation of Labor, are demands for a " voice " in 
 the settlement of conditions of work. But this de- 
 mand is not recognized by capital as a principle. It 
 is only recognized as a necessity when labor, through 
 superior strength, secures its demands in this trade 
 and that. The concession to labor of a voice in de- 
 termining conditions of work means by implication 
 to capital that management as a whole is still in its 
 
 S30 
 
 I 
 
 SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT 231 
 
 own hands; it also means that its actual title to 
 superior, or ownership rights, is not in question. 
 
 The Industrial Workers of the World leaves no 
 doubt in the mind of capital that it claims only a 
 voice in the management of industry. It makes its 
 fight on the grounds of labor's sole ownership, as 
 well as right, to sole management in all that labor 
 produces. Every strike, every difference between or- 
 ganized labor and capital, is an attempt of the former 
 to wrest management, or some degree of management, 
 from the latter. Whether it is an A. F. of L. or an 
 I. W. W. fight, there is in each and every one this 
 issue of management. The question of management 
 is, in fact, the labor movement. 
 
 If production is to be scientifically managed, or- 
 ganized labor insists that it shall have a hand in the 
 management, or it shall do the managing. It refuses 
 to grow enthusiastic over propositions which are 
 worked out for it, or without its cooperation, by 
 others who claim to know better than labor knows 
 what is for its good. 
 
 It was with something like pained surprise that 
 the advocates of scientific management discovered 
 that their propositions to manage labor more effi- 
 ciently, and to lighten its burdens, met a cold reception 
 at the hands of the conservative, as well as the 
 radical, labor unions. It is conceivable that the effi- 
 ciency systems of scientific management might admit 
 the labor unions in conference in the settlement of 
 
 
 %\ 
 
l^ 
 
 
 ^ t 
 
 ll 
 
 ': i. 
 
 m^ 
 
 232 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 conditions; but it is evident that nothing is further 
 from the intention of the promoters of the science, 
 and that such a proposition would quite seriously 
 impair its purpose. 
 
 Mr. Frederick W. Taylor, the leader of the move- 
 ment, states : " The greater advantage comes from the 
 new and unheard-of burdens which are assumed by 
 the men in the management, duties which have never 
 been performed by the men or the management side." ^ 
 These new duties Mr. Taylor divides into four large 
 classes, calling them " The Four Principles of Scien- 
 tific Management," all of which, he says, are necessary 
 to secure its object, which is " the increased output per 
 unit of human effort." 
 
 The first of these four great duties (as he also names 
 them) which are undertaken by the management is to 
 deliberately gather in all the rule of thumb knowledge 
 which IS possessed by all the twenty different kinds of 
 tradesmen who are at work in the establishment. Knowl- 
 edge which has never been recorded is in the heads 
 hands and bodies, in the knack, skill and dexterity which 
 these men possess. . . . 
 
 The second of the new duties assumed by the manage- 
 ment is the scientific selection and then the progressive 
 development of the workmen. The workmen are studied • 
 It may seem preposterous, but they are studied just as 
 machines have been studied. . . . 
 
 The third duty is to bring the scientifically selected 
 workmen and the science together. They must be 
 brought together ; they will not come together without it. 
 I do not wish for an instant to have any one think I have 
 a poor opinion of a workman; far from it. I merely 
 
 SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT 
 
 233 
 
 state a fact when I say that you may put your scientific 
 methods before a workman all you are a mind to, and 
 nine times out of ten he will do the same old way . . . 
 when I say, make the workman do his work in accord- 
 ance with the laws of science I do not say make in an 
 arbitrary sense ... I want to qualify the word make, 
 it has rather a hard sound. Some one must inspire the 
 man to make the change. . . . 
 
 The fourth principle is a deliberate division of the 
 work which was formerly done by the workman into two 
 sections, one of which is handed over to the manage- 
 ment. An immense mass of new duties is thrown on 
 the management, which formerly belonged to the work- 
 men . . . requiring cooperation between the manage- 
 ment and the workmen, which accounts more than any- 
 thing else for the fact that there has never been a strike 
 under scientific management. ... In one of our ma- 
 chine shops, for instance, where we do miscellaneous 
 work . . . there will be at least one man on the man- 
 agement side for every three workmen. . . .* 
 
 Each one of these " scientific " propositions is per- 
 fectly familiar to the workman in spite of the rather 
 naive assurance of the efficiency engineers that they 
 are new. He has known them in slightly different 
 guise for a century past. The new thing is the propo- 
 sition to develop what has been in the past the tricks 
 of the trade into a principle of production. Scientific 
 management logically follows and completes the 
 factory process. 
 
 The first and fourth of Mr. Taylor's great duties 
 or principles is to deliberately gather in all the rule 
 of thumb knowledge of all workmen, and transfer 
 
*•■: 
 
 i 
 
 I' 
 
 ! 
 
 it 
 
 tl 
 
 234 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 this knowledge to the management. That is exactly 
 what machinery did and is still doing to craft workers. 
 It usurped the knowledge of the worker and trans^ 
 ferred that knowledge to the management. The great 
 discovery of scientific management is that machinery 
 IS not absorbing completely, or as completely as it 
 should, a workman's trade knowledge. 
 
 Mr. Taylor says : " This knowledge is the greatest 
 asset that a workman possesses. It is his capital." ^ 
 The task which efficiency engineers have set them- 
 selves is to gather up the last vestiges of capital 
 possessed by the workingman, and place it for safe 
 keeping and efficiency under The Management. 
 
 There is an impression that all efficiency methods 
 originate in the brains of efficiency engineers, or 
 with the management. Mr. Taylor is not alone in 
 assuring us that the methods are discovered in the 
 heads and in the hands of the workers, that they 
 are the result of the worker's experience in very great 
 degree. 
 
 The following story was told by a manufacturer 
 as an illustration : 
 
 A shoe manufacturer told one girl that he wanted to see 
 
 how much she could do She said : " Well, there is a 
 
 certam kind of a filler that I used in another factory. 
 If you will use that kind of a filler I can do my work 
 so much more quickly. Another thing, the paper you 
 are using on that tip is too coarse. If you will use a 
 finer paper I won't have to use so much filler " The 
 story concluded: "So that girl and this manufacturer 
 
 SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT 235 
 
 worked out a condition that made it easier for her to 
 perform more work." * 
 
 Scientific management is a good scavenger. It is 
 out for every scrap of trade knowledge. Following 
 the machine, it proposes to clean up the last vestige 
 of craftsmanship and to put the shipshape touches 
 to modern industry. There are to be no chance bits 
 of capital lying around loose in the hands of this 
 man and that when the efficiency engineers have 
 
 finished their job. 
 
 The second and third of the Four Principles show 
 how this is done. Mr. Taylor says : " The workmen 
 are 'studied' just as machines have been studied." 
 And, finally, it is necessary *' to bring the scientifically 
 selected workman and the science together " by " in- 
 spiring " the workman. 
 
 The workman is to be scientifically selected by a 
 teacher instead of by a foreman; he is to be 
 "studied" by this teacher, as well as taught, and 
 the " unit of human effort " is to be squeezed out of 
 him by observing the law of rest and fatigue. 
 
 He is to be inspired by the same old bonus of the 
 same old task system in which he has served his time. 
 But the bonus or rate, according to efficiency en- 
 gineers, is never to be cut, as it has been cut in the 
 past by employers who speeded up their workers. 
 If the old-time employer ever made so gentlemanly 
 a promise regarding the continuous payment of a 
 bonus, he knew he could not keep it. He knew that 
 
 
 < 
 
 m 
 
 ^ \ 
 
m 
 
 !'i 
 
 rl 
 
 In i 
 
 
 I 
 
 236 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 even out of the goodness of his heart he could not 
 indefinitely continue a bonus or a rate which his com- 
 petitors did not pay. 
 
 But apparently scientific management requires of 
 mdustry certain ethical standards. Mr. Taylor says 
 that scientific management involves a complete revolu- 
 tion, both on the part of the management and of the 
 men; a complete change in the mental attitude on 
 both sides. Labor would agree with Mr. Taylor, and 
 add that it would require as well a mental revolution 
 in Wall Street. Apparently this is what the " New 
 Capitalism," of which scientific management is a part, 
 does require. 
 
 " New Capitalism " proposes to disregard the law of 
 wages, and to substitute a beneficent law which pays 
 better wages, also better profits. But the results have 
 not as yet justified the workers in surrendering 
 their own agencies for self-protection. As yet labor 
 IS unconscious of any sloughing oflF in hardships under 
 the law of supply and demand. It is not conscious 
 that the introduction of methods which have for 
 their object the " increased output of human effort " 
 has had any appreciable connection with wages or 
 wage rates. 
 
 Union men cite numberless cases where efficiency 
 methods have been introduced, like the task and bonus 
 systems, the stop watch, the observation of the laws 
 of rest and fatigue, and yet wage rates were not 
 increased, but were, in the course of time, reduced. 
 
 
 SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT 237 
 
 The efficiency engineer answers : " Ah, then that is 
 not scientific management!" But he will state in 
 conventions to other efficiency engineers that he has 
 great trouble in getting the management to carry out 
 the end of their program which will insure the worker 
 the receipt of his bonus. An efficiency promoter ob- 
 served on one of these occasions : " I have had so 
 many letters from people who look on scientific man- 
 agement as a new instrument by which they could 
 squeeze a little more out of the workman and give him 
 no return. I do not want to have anything to do with 
 them. We must share what we get." ^ 
 
 Organized labor appreciates the wish, but recog- 
 nizes the difficulty for an efficiency engineer to be 
 an engineer and a financier in action at one and the 
 same time. It is not the efficiency engineer who can 
 fulfill his own promise. He must leave it to the 
 capitalists to "share what they get" of the new 
 capital which the engineer has collected out of the 
 hands or brains of the workers. 
 
 In scientifically managed plants there is no change . 
 whatever in the status of capital and labor, except 
 the extended enslavement of the latter. Efficiency 
 engineers might successfully promote scientific man- 
 agement by advertising their hope that the manage- 
 ment will " share what it gets " if the factory system 
 had been a less efficient teacher. But the factory 
 system has taught the workers by a series of object 
 lessons. Labor unions represent those workers who 
 
 II 
 
 ■■«.. 
 
 i*! 
 
lili 
 
 it 
 
 m 
 
 11 
 
 238 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 have learned that they must rely on schemes for relief 
 which they themselves initiate or control. 
 
 The rest and fatigue schemes of scientific manage- 
 ment are especially worthy of suspicion. These 
 schemes propose to finish the job of reducing the 
 laborer to a machine attachment, to rob him of what 
 little initiative may be left him in a certain freedom 
 of motion. ^^ Mr. Taylor defines his idea of initiative. 
 He says: "The manufacturer who has any intelli- 
 gence must realize that his first duty should be to 
 obtain the initiative of all these tradesmen who are 
 working under him; to obtain their hard work, their 
 good will, their ingenuity, their determination to treat 
 the employer's business as if it were their own. And in 
 this connection I wish to strain the meaning of the 
 word J initiative ' to indicate all of these good quali- 
 ties." « Mr. Taylor is very much in earnest in this. 
 His rather violent use of the word " initiative " sug- 
 gests the possibility that efficiency engineers are rather 
 given to doing violence to other terms, such as rest 
 and fatigue. 
 
 But to return to initiative. One of the advo- 
 cates of scientific management considers it an error 
 to suppose that where efficiency methods have not 
 been introduced there is any initiative left the worker, 
 and says there is nothing intellectually stimulating in 
 leaving a worker free to go after and select his own 
 tools. This trifling idea of freedom, the last left the 
 worker, is foolishly guarded. He says the machine 
 
 SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT 239 
 
 does not waste time in planning; it proceeds at once 
 to performance, and that is what the man must be 
 made to do. Contrast the mental state of two car- 
 penters, although neither is worthy of mention or 
 comparison, according to the science of efficiency. 
 One of the carpenters decides on his tools, places them 
 according to his choice, and marks off his work. That 
 is the inefficient carpenter. The efficient carpenter is 
 assigned a place, handed his tools or his hammer and 
 nails, his nail holes are marked out. Under the eye 
 of a teacher he follows instructions for successive 
 hours with intermissions prescribed. This man is not 
 a carpenter. He is not a man. He is the dynamo 
 of the hammer he holds. 
 
 American Medicine comments editorially on the 
 result to labor of efficiency schemes to relieve it of 
 " wasted " effort : 
 
 Working along with his partner, "the efficiency en- 
 gineer," the speeder-up, has managed to obtain from the 
 factory worker a larger output in the same period of 
 time. This is done by eliminating the so-called super- 
 fluous motions of the arms and fingers, i.e., those 
 which do not contribute directly to the fashioning of 
 the article under process of manufacture. . . . The 
 movements thought to be superfluous simply represent 
 nature's attempt to rest the strained and tired muscles. 
 Whenever the muscles of the arms and fingers, or of 
 any part of the body for that matter, undertake to do 
 a definite piece of work, it is physiologically imperative 
 that they do not accomplish it by the shortest mathematical 
 route. A rigid to and fro movement is possible only to 
 
 I 
 
 i' ' 
 
\\' 
 
 rii 
 
 :4 
 
 '\ 
 
 240 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 machinery; muscles necessarily move in curves and 
 that ,s why grace is characteristic of muscular move- 
 ment and IS absent from a machine. The more finished 
 the technique of a workman and the greater his strength 
 
 nnrtT" !?''^"^ ^'' ^'' movements, and, what is im- 
 portant m this connection, vice versa. A certain flourish 
 superfluous only to the untrained eye, is absXtei; 
 characteristic of the efficient workman's motions. 
 
 bpeeding-up " eliminates grace and the curved move- 
 ment of physiological repose and thus induces an ir- 
 resistible fatigue, first in the small muscles, second, in 
 the trunk, ultimately in the brain and nervous system 
 The early result is a fagged and spiritless worker of the 
 
 IZlT^^'^'u^u " ^P^^^^^-"P'^ " partner, the " efficiency 
 engineer, will be anxious to replace by a younger and 
 fresher candidate, who in his turn will soon follow his 
 predecessor if the same relentless process is enforced. 
 It will always be necessary to consider workers as 
 human beings, and charity and moderation in the exac 
 tion of results will usually be found the part of wisdom 
 as representing a wise economy of resources. This 
 scientific charity, however, is something quite apart from 
 the moral eflFect on the personnel of due recognition of 
 their long service and of the loyalty which is likely to 
 accompany it.^ 
 
 All propositions to increase wealth make an appeal 
 to imagination. No one, certainly not organized 
 labor, doubts the ability of American capitalists to 
 discover new schemes for increasing the output, nor 
 of the American workman to produce it. It has been 
 reported that the labor cost of production in England, 
 with its lower wage rates, is higher than the cost in 
 America, because the American workmen, through the 
 
 SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT 241 
 
 pressure of management, yield an amount per worker 
 unknown to English labor. Scientific management 
 proposes to increase this yield by several hundred 
 
 per cent. 
 
 Workers looking back a generation or two may 
 admit that with the introduction of machine processes 
 they have here and there reaped a harvest of several 
 cotton shirts instead of one woolen, a standing lamp 
 instead of the ancestral candlestick, and, as clear 
 gain, a Victor talking machine. But no one is ever 
 jubilant over luxuries which they have bought with 
 their lives. It is organized labor alone that remem- 
 bers the ghastly price paid for increased consumption; 
 the generations of men, women, and children who 
 have been maimed and murdered in the process. 
 Greed and desire, not the well-being of labor, are still 
 the motive forces back of increased wealth production. 
 If we are about to enter upon an era of a " New Cap- 
 italism " which recognizes that it will pay to increase 
 the number of cotton shirts without exacting so heavy 
 a toll as has been exacted in the past, organized labor 
 still demands that it shall determine, or have a voice 
 in determining, what that toll shall be and what 
 shall be the reward. 
 
 Scientific management, the promoters say, recog- 
 nizes no difference in determining standards of effi- 
 ciency between management, capital goods and labor. 
 Well and good; labor does. 
 
 Organized labor's observations of a worker do not 
 
i! I 
 
 I! 
 
 I ! 
 
 ^it' 
 
 ^ AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 end with the day's work. They extend over the wear 
 
 a worker s abihty to react after work, mentally as well 
 Ike^'hT^ ^''' '''' ^"^^ ^^-^-^- the 
 
 f labor had an opportunity to fix a maximum con- 
 
 ortL'e^lT T" """"'^^ management and 
 organized labor is that the aim of the latter is to 
 make men, the aim of the former is to make goods 
 
 CHAPTER XIX 
 LABOR IN POLITICS 
 
 Socialist Party efforts to commit labor unions— Original policy 
 of A. F. of L. aloof from all political action— Reversed 
 policy— Entered practical politics, not partizan— Election of 
 union card men— Radical political declaration of Washing- 
 ton State Federation— Opposition of I. W. W. to all political 
 affiliations. 
 
 The American Federation of Labor, as a national 
 organization, refrained from all political activity until 
 recently and still refuses allegiance to any one party. 
 Socialist Party representatives have worked indus- 
 triously to secure the indorsement of the Socialist 
 position, as well as of the Socialist Party, on the 
 ground that it was the only political party which 
 stood unequivocally for labor. The Federation has 
 not only resisted the " Socialist element,'* as it is 
 derisively called; it has attacked it with bitterness, 
 and in much the same spirit as it attacks the sworn 
 enemies of the capitalist class. The National Ex- 
 ecutive of the Federation, at its convention of 1912, 
 commented on an event of the past year as follows: 
 " What could be expected from the National Manu- 
 facturers' Association, their agents and their hirelings? 
 . . .. What from the Socialists, except to em- 
 ploy the occasion for vote catching? What from such 
 
 843 
 
i 
 
 1^; 
 
 244 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 reactionary organs as the New York Sun but diatribes? 
 .... So long as these declared enemies of the 
 trade unions are what they are, and unionism is what 
 It is, no help can come from them to the labor 
 movement." ^ 
 
 The Federation has borne many undeserved accusa- 
 tions, but it has officially kept itself free from the 
 Socialist element." While this " element " has in- 
 creased within the membership of the Federation, and 
 while It polls a one-third vote at the conventions, the 
 Federation has successfully resisted all attempts to 
 commit it to the Socialist Party. 
 
 Various organizations affiliated with the American 
 Federation, especially the city organizations, in dif- 
 ferent parts of the country, have indorsed and worked 
 for the election of candidates to municipal office on 
 the ground that they would favor the interests of 
 organized labor if elected. Local politicians through- 
 out the country have sought and placed high value 
 on the support of the local trade union men and 
 their organizations. 
 
 The American Federation of Labor as a national 
 organization withheld its indorsement of candidates 
 for national office, and refrained from active par- 
 ticipation in elections. It feared that political ac- 
 tivities might divert its energies and divide its 
 ranks; it feared that a political campaign might 
 impair its united front; it feared also political en- 
 tanglements and attacks on its reputation for single- 
 
 LABOR IN POLITICS 
 
 245 
 
 ness of purpose, which many of its local organizations 
 had experienced on account of their political alli- 
 ances. 
 
 It was in 1906 that the American Federation of 
 Labor reversed its policy and entered the field of 
 what it calls practical politics in contradistinction to 
 partizan politics. The policy first adopted was to 
 induce one of the regular parties to nominate on a 
 regular party ticket a member of the Federation as 
 a representative to Congress. Efforts were made in 
 every state to secure these nominations. From 1906 
 to 1910 ten " union card men " were elected, owing 
 political allegiance to either the Democratic or Repub- 
 lican Party as its candidate. 
 
 The Federation took the position that the allegiance 
 of these representatives to their political parties would 
 not interfere with their support of measures of interest 
 to the Federation and organized labor generally. 
 This policy was carried against a storm of Socialist 
 opposition. In 1910 the Federation adopted the slo- 
 gan, "stand faithfully by our friends, oppose and 
 defeat our enemies, whether they be candidates for 
 President, for Congress or for other offices, whether 
 executive, legislative or judicial." 
 
 The opponents of such political action, others as 
 well as the Socialists, within the Federation, claimed 
 that the Federation's indorsement of the Presidential 
 candidate for 1908 and its failure to carry the elec- 
 tion, weakened the position of the trade unions in 
 
If 
 
 
 246 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 their legitimate field of bargaining for terms of 
 employment. 
 
 The President of the Federation, in his message 
 to the convention of 19 12, said: 
 
 The American Federation of Labor is not partizan to 
 any political party, but it is partizan to a principle-to 
 achieve results in the interests of the great mass of the 
 wage earners of our continent. It resents the attitude 
 of those who seek to force the workers back into the 
 condition and character of serfdom, and with equal 
 msistence it refuses to postpone to the far future the 
 advantages and benefits of a better life which we pro- 
 pose to secure them here and now. 
 
 Taking into consideration that which organized labor 
 has already accomplished upon the economic, political, 
 and legislative fields to bring light and life into the homes 
 and workshops of the toiling masses, we are fully con- 
 
 hnl".n> ^''^''' '"f ''' ^" '^^ ^"^"^^- The spirit and 
 humanitarianism cultivated and developed by the or- 
 ganized labor movement will find its full fruition in the 
 material, socia and moral standards of our people, and 
 will be crystahzed in the written laws of our knd and 
 the unwritten laws of our daily lives. * 
 
 It was in this tone that the President strained 
 every eflFort to carry the delegates and to secure an 
 enthusiastic support of the political policy and the 
 political action of the officers of the Federation. 
 The policy and the action were indorsed, but not 
 unanimously. 
 
 This policy advocated by the Federation was op- 
 posed by the Socialist members of the Federation, who 
 
 LABOR IN POLITICS 
 
 247 
 
 took the position that labor as a class must control 
 its political representatives through a political organ- 
 ization of its own as they controlled their representa- 
 tives in their trade organizations. The Washington 
 State Federation, chartered by the American Federa- 
 tion, at its convention of 1913. open^Y refuted the 
 policy of its national organization of supporting can- 
 didates pledged to one of the regular parties. It 
 resolved : 
 
 Whereas, the political parties now in control of our 
 government are owned and controlled by our mdustnal 
 
 masters ... , 1 r 
 
 Whereas, the masters recognize the value of con- 
 trol of the state, and secure and maintain their control 
 by electing members of their class to office, legislative, 
 executive, and judicial. ... ^ •* 1 
 
 Whereas, the statement that the interests of capital 
 and labor are identical is absurdly false, and is intended 
 to blind the workers to their own interests and to mis- 
 lead them into giving support to interests diametrically 
 opposed to their own; 
 
 Therefore be it Resolved, that we recommend to the 
 workers that they vote for members of their own class to 
 fill all legislative, executive, or judicial positions. . . .* 
 
 The Washington State Federation stands alone 
 among the state organizations of the Federation in 
 its revolutionary position and opposition to the more 
 conservative and opportunistic policy. 
 
 The Industrial Workers of the World opposes all 
 allegiance to political parties or indorsement of polit- 
 
 t\ 
 
 sn 
 
248 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 ical action. Its theory of " Direct Action " is not 
 necessarily a substitute for political action, as it is 
 considered by many of its members, but it is the 
 exclusive method of the organization. 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 I* 
 
 lU 
 
 CHAPTER XX 
 
 DIRECT ACTION 
 
 Is the antithesis of political action but not necessarily opposed to 
 it— Comparative value as a labor weapon— Object ot direct 
 action— Present advocacy opportune. 
 
 Direct action is not necessarily opposed to political 
 action, although the term originated in the desire to 
 distinguish between organized labor's efforts to secure 
 its objects by more direct methods than political 
 representation. 
 
 It arose out of labor's disappointment in the efforts 
 it had expended politically. Labor had found that its 
 representatives sitting in state councils rife with 
 the doctrines and influences of a capitalist society, 
 gradually lost the point of view of those whom they 
 were there to represent. 
 
 It found also that political action, delegating, as 
 it does of necessity, all action to representatives, 
 offered the mass of the workers little if any oppor- 
 tunity for experience or initiative in the solution of 
 their own problems. Direct actionists claim that the 
 object of the labor movement is to minimize the 
 delegation of power and to increase the power of 
 the mass of the workers, individually and collect- 
 ively. The plaint of labor is, in fact, that one group 
 
 349 
 
V- t 
 
 250 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 of people has assumed the direction and management 
 of affairs of another group, that capital manages and 
 speaks for labor, with a consequent weakness to labor 
 of unused or enslaved powers. 
 
 Labor can only learn to do by doing, is the idea 
 back of direct action. Representation gives labor no 
 exercise and no opportunities to develop. 
 
 Even should political representatives legislate in the 
 mterests of labor, and even were it possible for repre- 
 sentatives to hold and keep the labor point of view 
 they would not meet labor's chief need: the oppor^ 
 tunity to exercise its own faculties and to develop 
 mitiative. What labor wants above all else is to gain 
 m strength, the strength to do, and this is in itself 
 more important than all the material advantages 
 which might accrue through a Socialist state or a 
 benevolent plutocracy. 
 
 This is the gist of the theory of direct action, 
 and, unmodified, is the theory of anarchism, which is 
 opposed in principle to delegated power. But all 
 direct actionists do not oppose political action, and 
 many indorse it. All direct actionists see or feel the 
 necessity of organizations of labor which provide a 
 large measure of latitude for initiative of the workers 
 in their struggle with capital, of organizations which 
 provide for the maximum amount of mass action. 
 But all object to the tendency of political action to rob 
 rather than supply the workers with opportunities to 
 test and exercise their own powers. 
 
 DIRECT ACTION 
 
 251 
 
 Direct actionists also claim that political action is 
 an instrument which people with formal education, 
 sophisticated people, can handle more successfully and 
 deftly than people who have never directed others. 
 Moreover, labor's representatives, and those politically 
 active in labor's interests, are invariably men and 
 women who are more or less removed from the 
 intenser forms of industrial employment, and many 
 of them are people whose knowledge of the labor need 
 and the labor movement is theoretical. 
 
 It is, moreover, less possible for workers, unaccus- 
 tomed to initiate or direct, to hold their place in po- 
 litical life by the side of others who are in the habit of 
 ruling or regulating the work and the lives of other 
 people. The latter inevitably in political affairs will 
 take the lead and will have no keen understanding of 
 the ordinary working man, and less sympathy with 
 his vital interests which are opposed to their own. 
 
 Specifically, then, direct action means the efforts of 
 labor unions to transfer power in part or in whole 
 from capital to labor without the interference of the 
 
 political state. 
 
 While American trade unions never use the term, 
 it applies, nevertheless, to all efforts of the trade union- 
 ist in collective bargaining, boycotts, strikes, limitation 
 of output, and other trade regulations initiated and 
 enforced by a union. 
 
 In America, the term is used by the Industrial Work- 
 ers of the World in their appeal to workers to depend 
 
 i 
 
 li 
 
 Mi 
 
ll 
 
 252 AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS 
 
 upon themselves, and, through their organizations, se- 
 cure control of the industry in which they work. The 
 methods advocated are strikes, sabotage, and agitation. 
 As the Industrial Workers expect direct action on 
 its educational side to develop power through oppor- 
 tunities for doing, it would seem to follow that within 
 the organization there would be less delegation of 
 power and less representation than in other unions. 
 It is true that there is less representation, but it is also 
 true that the plan of the organization is the centraliza- 
 tion of large powers in a national executive. There is 
 at present a movement on foot within the organization 
 for decentralization. 
 
 If direct action in the hands of the Industrial Work- 
 ers should fail as a present strategic measure, the or- 
 ganization in advocating it has advertised successfully 
 and at a propitious time that opportunity for initiative 
 is a more fundamental need of workers, whose days 
 are spent in monotonous toil and under machine di- 
 rection, than are slight increases in wages. The Indus- 
 trial Workers, in emphasizing the importance of direct 
 action, bring out the point that labor union action, 
 dealing as it does with the direct and immediate inter- 
 ests of the workers, calls for simpler forms of social 
 expression, forms of expression less remote in their 
 functioning and results, than political action. Political 
 action in comparison, they observe, is a more sophisti- 
 cated expression of more complex relations. 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 Directory of the International Unions of the A. F. of L.; to- 
 gether with reports for 1913 on convention vote, showing the 
 comparative strength of the unions; the number of strikes which 
 occurred in 1913; the settlements which were made fixmg condi- 
 tions without resorting to strikes— Distribution by states and 
 towns of local unions of the I. W. W. 
 
 If 
 
 if m 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 American Federation of Labor 
 
 The membership of the A. F. of L. is 2,000,000 (as reported at 
 conveS in 1913 it was 1,996,004). There are iio National 
 and International unions controlling 22,000 local unions ; there 
 a?e 5 Departments; 42 State Branches; 623 City Central Umons; 
 642 Local Trade and Federal Labor Unions. 
 
 Directors of American Federation of Labor National and In- 
 ternational unions. Reports for 1913 on convention vote; num- 
 ber of strikes; settlements without strikes. 
 
 t 
 
 I'M 
 
 Name 
 
 Headquarters 
 
 
 Asbestos Workers, Inter. Asso. 
 
 liA^"!''\^.T:.^'^"^^^^^ St. Louis, Mo.... 
 Bakery and Confectionery 
 
 Workers' Inter. Union...... Chicago, 111 
 
 Barbers' International Union, r„ t«/I 
 
 Journeymen • Indianapolis. Ind. 
 
 Bill Posters and Billers of 
 
 America, Inter. Alliance of. New York, N. Y. 
 Blacksmiths, Inter. Brother- 
 
 hood of Chicago, 111 
 
 Boilermakers and Iron Ship- 
 builders of America, Broth- 
 
 erhood of Kansas City, Kan. 
 
 Bookbinders, Inter. Brother- 
 
 hood of Indianapolis, Ind. 
 
 Boot and Shoe Workers' 
 
 Union Boston, Mass. . . 
 
 Brewery Workmen, Interna- 
 
 tional Union of the United. Cincinnati, O.... 
 Brick, Tile, and Terra Cotta 
 
 Workers' Alliance, Inter. ... Chicago, 111 
 
 Bridge and Structural Iron ,. t ^ 
 
 Workers, Inter. Asso. of... Indianapohs, ma. 
 
 355 
 
 >> B ll 
 
 § ^ $5 
 
 873 
 
 151 12 120 
 
 318 t 53 
 
 14 • • * * * 
 
 90 3 14 
 
 162 85 ... 
 
 91 
 
 . » • • 
 
 343 14 ••• 
 
 450 32 262 
 
 39 17 ..• 
 
 100 .. ••• 
 
 

 
 256 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 § 
 
 Nftiue 
 
 Headquarters 
 
 Broom and Whiskmakers' 
 
 Union, International Chicago, 111 
 
 Brushmakers' Inter. Union... Brooklyn, N. Y. . 
 Carpenters and Joiners of 
 
 Am., United Brotherhood of Indianapolis, Ind. 
 Carriage, Wagon, and Auto 
 Workers of N. A., Interna- 
 tional Union of Buffalo, N. Y... 
 
 Cement Workers, American 
 
 Brotherhood of S. Francisco, Cal. 
 
 Cigarmakers' Inter. Union of 
 America Chicago, 111 
 
 Cloth, Hat, and Cap Makers 
 of N. A., United New York, N. Y. 
 
 Commercial Telegraphers' Un- 
 ion of America Chicago, 111 
 
 Compressed Air and Founda- 
 tion Workers' Union of the 
 United States and Canada.. Brooklyn, N. Y.. 
 
 Coopers' Inter. Union of N. A. Kansas City, Kan. 
 
 Cutting, Die, and Cutter Mak- 
 ers, Inter. Union of New York, N. Y. 
 
 Diamond Workers' Protective 
 Union of America Brooklyn, N. Y. . 
 
 Electrical Workers of Am., 
 Inter. Brotherhood of Springfield, III. .. 
 
 Elevator Constructors, Inter. 
 Union of Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Engineers, Inter. Union of 
 Steam and Operating Chicago, 111 
 
 Firemen, Inter. Brotherhood 
 of Stationary Omaha, Neb 
 
 Foundry Employees, Interna- 
 tional Brotherhood of St. Louis, Mo... 
 
 Freight Handlers, Brother- 
 hood of Railroad Chicago, 111 
 
 Fur Workers' Union of U. S. 
 and Canada New York, N. Y. 
 
 Garment Workers of America, 
 
 ^ United New York, N. Y. 
 
 Garment Workers' Union, In- 
 ternational (ladies') New York, N. Y. 
 
 Glass Bottle Blowers* Asso. of 
 t|ie U. S. and Canada Philadelphia, Pa . 
 
 ■Ha ? f^il 
 
 a>t3 
 <0g 
 
 a 
 
 2 2 12 
 
 2107 30 125 
 
 29 5 26 
 
 90 
 
 402 48 21 
 
 38 35 ... 
 
 10 I I 
 
 o . . ... 
 
 46 21 25 
 
 O * * • • • 
 
 227 
 
 28 
 
 42 
 
 26 
 
 2 
 
 • • • 
 
 200 
 
 18 
 
 • • • 
 
 160 
 
 II 
 
 500 
 
 5 
 
 I 
 
 • • • 
 
 10 
 
 • • 
 
 • • • 
 
 • • • 
 
 585 
 
 • • 
 
 5 
 
 • • • 
 
 522 
 
 788 
 
 10 
 
 I 
 
 100 
 
 2 
 
 • • • 
 
 Name 
 
 Headquarters 
 
 Glass Workers' Inter. Asso., 
 Amalgamated ..••;•••••••• ^^^ ° ' 
 
 Glass Workers' Union, Am. _ . . ^ 
 
 Flint ,-;;:--TA-- ' 
 
 Glove Workers' Union of Am., 
 
 International Chicago. Ill 
 
 Granite Cutters' Inter. Asso. . 
 
 of America ;....• Q^^ncy, Mass. . . 
 
 Grinders' and Finishers Na- 
 tional Union, Pocketknife 
 
 TDiarfp Bridgeport, Conn. 
 
 Hatters of* N. A., United New York, N. Y. 
 
 Hod Carriers' Building and 
 
 Common Laborers' Union 
 
 of America, International. . . Albany, iN. Y . . . . 
 Horseshoers' of U. S. and 
 
 Canada, Inter. Union of , 
 
 Journeymen Cincinnati, U. . . . 
 
 Hotel and Restaurant Em- 
 ployees' Inter. Alliance and 
 
 Bartenders' Inter. League of . 
 
 .America Cincinnati, O. ... 
 
 Iron, Steel, and Tin Workers, 
 
 Amal. Asso. of Pittsburg, Pa. ... 
 
 Lace Operatives of America, 
 
 .Chartered Soc. of Amal.... Philadelphia, Pa- 
 Lathers', Inter. Union of , , ^ 
 
 Wood, Wire, and Metal.... Cleveland, U. ... 
 Laundry Workers' Interna- 
 
 tional Union Troy, N. Y 
 
 Leather Workers on Horse 
 
 Goods, United Brother, of.. Kansas City, Mo. 
 Lithographers, Inter. Protec- 
 
 ,tive and Beneficial Asso. of 
 
 N. A. and Canada New York, N. Y. 
 
 Lithographic Press Feeders of 
 
 U. S. and Canada, Inter. r , xt v 
 
 Protective Asso. of New York, N. Y. 
 
 Longshoremen's Asso., Inter.. Buffalo, N. Y 
 
 Machine Printers and Color 
 Mixers of the U. S., Nat. 
 
 Asso. of Buffalo, N. Y.... 
 
 Machinists, Inter. Asso. of... Washington, D.C. 
 
 257 
 « 
 
 gwM 
 
 go a 6*. 
 
 13 3 7 
 
 91 8 . . . 
 
 13 6 12 
 
 135 38 ... 
 
 • ... 
 
 85 2 . . . 
 
 221 24 ... 
 
 53 4 20 
 
 539 43 ••• 
 
 55 2 ... 
 
 II 6 ... 
 
 50 
 
 26 2 30 
 
 19 . . « . • 
 
 20 • • • • • 
 
 10 
 220 
 
 7 75 
 
 5 35 
 710 96 
 
 i ! 
 
 
 90 
 
 .• V 
 
t\ 
 
 m 
 
 258 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 8 
 
 t 
 
 Name 
 
 Headquarters 
 
 « c^ 
 
 
 a 
 o 
 U 
 
 Maintenance of Way Em- 
 ployees, Inter. Broth, of Detroit, Mich. ... 
 
 Marble Workers, Inter. As- 
 sociation of New York, N. Y. 
 
 Meat Cutters and Butcher 
 
 Workmen of N. A., Amal... Syracuse, N. Y.. 
 Metal Polishers,' Buffers', 
 Platers', Brass, and Silver 
 Workers' Union of N. A... Cincinnati, O, ... 
 Metal Workers' Inter. Alli- 
 ance, Amal. Sheet Kansas City, Mo. 
 
 Mine Workers of America, 
 United Indianapolis, Ind. 
 
 Miners, Western Federation 
 of Denver, Colo. . . . 
 
 Molders* Union of N. A., 
 International . Cincinnati, O. . . . 
 
 Musicians, American Federa- 
 tion of St. Louis, Mo.. . . 
 
 Painters, Decorators, and Pa- 
 perhangers of Am., Broth- 
 erhood of Lafayette, Ind. . . 
 
 Papermakers, Inter. Brother- 
 hood of Albany, N. Y.. . . 
 
 Patternmakers' League of N. 
 A Cincinnati, O. . .. 
 
 Pavers, Rammermen, Flag- 
 layers, Bridge, and Stone 
 Curb Setters, International 
 Union of New York, N. Y. 
 
 Paving Cutters' Union of the 
 U. S. and Canada Albion, N. Y. ... 
 
 Photo-Engravers' Union of N. 
 A., International Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Piano and Organ Workers' 
 Union of America, Inter... Chicago, 111 
 
 Plasterers' Inter. Asso. of U. 
 S. and Canada, Operative.. Middletown, O... 
 
 Plate Printers' Union of N. 
 A., Inter. Steel and Copper. Washington, D.C. 
 
 Plumbers and Steam Fitters 
 of the U. S. and Canada, 
 United Association of Chicago, 111 
 
 2 ^2 
 
 oO • . ... 
 
 30 4 . . . 
 
 54 12 81 
 
 100 30 100 
 
 169 23 ... 
 
 3708 
 
 485 13 ... 
 
 500 • • • • • 
 
 54^ 
 
 709 
 
 40 8 19 
 
 65 28 ... 
 
 15 
 
 35 9 
 
 44 6 
 
 10 s 
 
 173 .. 
 
 13 .. 
 
 • • • • • 
 
 69 
 7 
 
 290 
 
 '• ••• 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 Name 
 
 259 
 
 to 
 
 9>M 
 
 ** a <" ^ ii 
 
 § 
 
 Headquarters jjo ^ g^ 
 
 s 
 
 03 
 
 Postoffice Qerks, Nat. Federa- 
 
 tion of Washmgton, D.C. 
 
 Potters, Nat. Brotherhood of 
 
 Operative East Liverpool, O. 
 
 Powder and High Explosive ^ , ^ 
 
 Workers of Am., United... Columbus, Kan.. 
 Print Cutters' Asso. of Am., ^. xt t 
 
 National Jersey City, N. J. 
 
 Printing Pressmen's Union, 
 
 International RogersviUe, Tenn. 
 
 Pulp, Sulphite, and Paper Mill 
 
 Workers of the U. S. and 
 
 Canada Ft. Edward, N. Y. 
 
 Quarry Workers, Inter. Union 
 
 of N. A Barre, Vt 
 
 Railroad Telegraphers, Order 
 
 of St. Louis, Mo.. .. 
 
 Railway Carmen of America, 
 
 Brotherhood of Kansas City, Mo. 
 
 Railway Clerks, Brother, of.. Kansas City, Mo. 
 Railway Employees of Am., 
 
 Amal. Asso. of Street and 
 
 Electric Detroit, Mich. . . . 
 
 Retail Clerks, Inter. Protec- 
 tive Association Lafayette, Ind. .. 
 
 Roofers, Composition, Damp, 
 
 and Waterproof Workers of 
 
 the U. S. and Canada, Inter. 
 
 Brotherhood of Brooklyn, N. Y. . 
 
 Sawsmiths' National Union. . . Indianapolis, Ind. 
 
 Seamen's Union of Am., Inter. Chicago, 111 
 
 Shingle Weavers, Sawmill 
 
 Workers, and Woodsmen, 
 
 Inter. Union of Seattle, Wash. .. 
 
 Slate and Tile Roofers' Union 
 
 of America, International... Cleveland, O. ... 
 Slate Workers, Am. Brother- 
 hood of Penn Argyle, Pa. 
 
 Spinners' International Union Holyoke, Mass... 
 Stage Employees of America, 
 
 Inter. Alliance of Theatrical New York, N. Y. 
 Steel Plate Transferrers' Asso. 
 
 of America Washington, D.C. 
 
 V 3 
 
 22 
 
 65 .. 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 • • • 
 
 190 
 
 • • 
 
 66 
 
 31 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 40 
 
 5 
 
 12 
 
 250 
 
 • • 
 
 59 
 
 280 
 50 
 
 2 
 
 • • 
 
 50 
 
 • • • 
 
 457 
 
 21 
 
 76 
 
 150 
 
 I 
 
 • • • 
 
 12 
 
 I 
 160 
 
 5 
 
 • • 
 
 • • 
 
 4 
 
 • • • 
 
 • • • 
 
 31 
 
 • . . . • 
 
 6 3 
 
 o • • • . • 
 22 I ... 
 
 132 5 
 
 I • • • • • 
 
 I 
 
 ill 
 
 11 
 
 i 
 
 ■ :i 
 
26o 
 
 ^E 
 
 NDIX 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 Headquarters 
 
 8 
 
 ••* 
 
 So 
 
 CO 
 •** 
 
 u 
 
 lements 
 »ut Strike 
 
 
 
 d 
 
 CA 
 
 t5 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 «g 
 
 Name 
 
 Stereotypers' and Electrotyp- 
 ers* Union of N. A., Inter. . Boston, Mass. ... 
 
 Stonecutters* Asso. of N. A., 
 Journeymen Indianapolis, Ind. 
 
 Stove Mounters' International 
 
 ^ Union Detroit, Mich. . . . 
 
 Switchmen's Union of N. A.. Buffalo, N. Y... 
 
 Tailors* Union of Am., Jour- 
 neymen Bloomington, 111.. 
 
 Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Stable- 
 men, and Helpers of Am., 
 Inter. Brotherhood of Indianapolis, Ind. 
 
 Textile Workers of America, 
 
 ^ United Fall River, Mass. 
 
 Tilelayers' and Helpers' Inter. 
 Union, Ceramic, Mosaic, and 
 Encaustic Pittsburg, Pa 
 
 Tip Printers, Inter. Bro. of... Newark, N. J.... 
 
 Tobacco Workers' Inter. Union Louisville, Ky. . . 
 
 Travelers' Goods and Leather 
 Novelty Workers' Inter. 
 Union of America Oshkosh, Wis. . . 
 
 Tunnel and Subway Construc- 
 tors' International Union... New York, N. Y. 
 
 Typographical Union, Inter... Indianapolis, Ind. 
 
 Upholsterers' Inter. Union of 
 N. A L. I. City, N. Y. . 
 
 Weavers* Amalgamated Asso., 
 Elastic Goring Brockton, Mass. . 
 
 White Rats Actors' Union of 
 
 ,„^"^U^^ N'ew York, N. Y. 
 
 Wire Weavers' Protective As- Woodhaven, L. I., 
 
 sociation, American N. Y 
 
 Wood Carvers' Asso. of N. A., 
 
 International Roxbury, Mass.. 
 
 45 5 37 
 66 4 12 
 
 II 
 q6 
 
 • • 
 
 • • 
 
 22 
 
 • • • 
 
 120 
 
 28 
 
 5a 
 
 469 
 
 Z2 
 
 247 
 
 162 
 
 7 
 
 • • • 
 
 27 4 12 
 
 z . . . . • 
 
 36 
 
 941 
 
 19 16 10 
 
 564 15 158 
 
 31 
 
 15 
 
 I • • • • • 
 
 no 
 
 <i • • • . . 
 
 10 3 8 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 261 
 
 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD 
 Distribution of Unions by States and Territories 
 
 State 
 
 Town or City 
 
 Local Union No 
 
 Alaska 
 
 Ketchikan 
 
 283 
 
 
 
 Juneau 
 
 352 
 
 
 Arizona 
 
 Lowell 
 
 65br2 
 
 
 Bisbee 
 
 65 
 
 
 
 Phoenix 
 
 272 
 
 
 British Columbia 
 
 Victoria 
 
 94, 
 
 44, 58, 328 
 
 
 Vancouver 
 
 322, 
 
 45, 515 
 
 
 Prince Rupert 
 
 326 
 
 
 
 Kamloops 
 
 327 
 
 
 California 
 
 San Diego 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 Fresno 
 
 66 
 
 
 
 Sacramento 
 
 71, 
 
 489 
 
 
 Stockton 
 
 73 
 
 
 
 San Francisco 
 
 173, 
 
 9 
 
 
 Oakland 
 
 174 
 
 
 
 Colfax 
 
 334 
 
 
 
 Point Richmond 
 
 355 
 
 
 
 Redlands 
 
 419 
 
 
 
 Brawley 
 
 439 
 
 
 
 Coalinga 
 
 450 
 
 
 
 Taft 
 
 453 
 
 
 
 Vallejo 
 
 485 
 
 
 
 San Pedro 
 
 245 
 
 
 
 Eureka 
 
 431 
 
 
 Canada 
 
 
 
 
 Manitoba 
 
 Winnipeg 
 
 47 
 
 
 Alberta 
 
 Colorado 
 Connecticut 
 
 Florida 
 
 Calgary 
 Edmonton 
 
 Denver 
 
 New Britain 
 
 Norwich 
 
 Moosup 
 
 Shelton 
 
 Norwalk 
 
 26, 133 
 
 29 
 
 208 
 
 303 
 528 
 
 535 
 
 Tampa, Ybor City IQ2 
 
 1 1 
 
 i \\ 
 
262 
 
 state 
 
 Illinois 
 
 Indiana 
 
 Iowa 
 Louisiana 
 
 
 ,j * 
 i'i 
 
 Massachusetts 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 Town or City 
 Chicago 
 
 Peoria 
 
 Joliet 
 Staunton 
 Caseyville 
 Rockford 
 
 Shelbyville 
 
 Indianapolis 
 
 Gary 
 
 Valley Junction 
 
 Quadrate 
 
 Leesville 
 
 Merryville 
 
 Oakdale 
 
 Tioga 
 
 Flora 
 
 Pollack 
 
 Provencal 
 
 Osbourn 
 
 Hammons 
 
 Singer 
 
 West Lake 
 
 De Ridder 
 
 Zwolle 
 
 Mystic 
 
 De Quincy 
 
 Kinder 
 
 Starks 
 
 Oberlin 
 
 Rosepine 
 
 Derry 
 
 Phillips-Bluff 
 
 New Orleans 
 
 Boston 
 
 " Brookline 
 Lawrence 
 New Bedfard 
 Ware 
 Webster 
 Fitchburg 
 Fall River 
 Holyoke 
 Lowell 
 Montello 
 
 Local Union No. 
 3; 3br2; 21; 85br2, 3, 
 
 s; 104; 341; 465; 
 
 Soobri, 2; 526; ig6 
 27 
 142 
 242 
 244 
 480 
 
 483 
 
 52 
 
 577 
 208 
 
 210 
 218 
 219 
 228 
 235 
 254 
 259 
 
 274 
 288 
 
 289 
 36s 
 386 
 
 387 
 388 
 390 
 393 
 394 
 395 
 396 
 402 
 412 
 
 7 
 
 190, 34br2, IIS, 185, 
 
 574 
 20 
 
 157 
 162 
 
 166 
 
 199 
 
 204 
 
 205 
 
 436 
 
 31 
 
 SUte 
 Massachusetts 
 {continued) 
 
 Maryland 
 Michigan 
 
 Minneosta 
 
 Missouri 
 
 Montana 
 
 Nebraska 
 New Jersey 
 
 New York 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 263 
 
 Town or City 
 
 Local Union No. 
 
 Quincy 
 
 34 
 
 Milford 
 
 55 
 
 Charlestown 
 
 96 
 
 Haverhill 
 
 169 
 
 Gardner 
 
 548 
 
 East Boston 
 
 557 
 
 Roxbury 
 
 560 
 
 Baltimore 
 
 192 
 
 Detroit 
 
 i6bri, 2, 3, 62 
 
 Grand Rapids 
 
 202 
 
 Cadillac 
 
 407 
 
 Minneapolis 
 
 221, 2C3 
 
 Crosby 
 
 334 ^ 
 
 Duluth 
 
 68, 136 
 
 Kansas City 
 
 61 
 
 St. Louis 
 
 84, 84br2, I39bra 
 
 Missoula 
 
 40 
 
 Great Falls 
 
 571 
 
 Omaha 
 
 384 
 
 Jersey City 
 
 376, 119 
 
 Newark 
 
 90 
 
 Lodi 
 
 377 
 
 Hoboken 
 
 378 
 
 New Bergen 
 
 381 
 
 Paterson 
 
 152 
 
 West Hoboken 
 
 514 
 
 Hackensack 
 
 S16 
 
 New York 
 
 546, 5S6br2, 558, I, 
 
 
 189, 9, 95br2. 95, 
 
 
 95br3, 95br4, lOSbn, 
 
 
 br2, 123, 179, I79br2, 
 
 
 375 
 
 Cohoes 
 
 188 
 
 Rochester 
 
 191 
 
 Little Falls 
 
 207 
 
 Middle Village, 
 
 
 L. I. 
 
 527 
 
 Buffalo 
 
 5 
 
 Brooklyn 
 
 121, 122, 220, 374 
 
 Schenectady 
 
 81 
 
 r 
 
 A 
 
II 
 
 264 
 
 State 
 
 New Hampshire 
 North Carolina 
 Ohio 
 
 Oregon 
 
 Pennyslvania 
 
 Rhode Island 
 
 South Carolina 
 Texas 
 
 Utah 
 
 Virginia 
 Washington 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 Town or City 
 
 Manchester 
 
 Salem-Winston 
 
 Cleveland 
 
 Elyria 
 
 Toledo 
 
 Rhodesdale 
 
 Dillonvale 
 
 Akron 
 
 Dayton 
 
 Eugene 
 
 Portland 
 
 Marshfield 
 
 Allentown 
 Philadelphia 
 
 Belle Vernon 
 
 Wilkinsburg 
 
 McKeesport 
 
 Old Forge 
 
 Scranton 
 
 Pittsburg 
 
 Kittanning 
 
 Jessup 
 
 New Castle 
 
 Hazleton 
 
 Woonsocket 
 
 Providence 
 
 Olneyville 
 
 Grenville 
 
 Votaw 
 El Paso 
 
 Salt Lake City 
 
 Helper 
 
 Price 
 
 Newport News 
 Norfolk 
 
 Sedro Wooley 
 Bellingham 
 
 Local Union No. 
 163 
 
 570 
 
 33, 33br3 
 
 49 
 
 86 
 236 
 240 
 470 
 573 
 
 88 
 
 141, 93 
 435 
 
 525 
 
 57, 57br2. 11, iibr3, 
 125, 126, 137, 547, 
 
 „553, 425, 3 
 582 
 
 30 
 
 32 
 
 97, 118, 12.S, 511 
 
 98 
 
 loi, 215 
 2i5br2 
 238 
 297 
 518 
 
 99, S13 
 151 
 530 
 
 512 
 
 398 
 
 572 
 
 69 
 
 237 
 256 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 318 
 337 
 
 State 
 
 Washington 
 {continued) 
 
 Wisconsin 
 West Virginia 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 26s 
 
 Town or City 
 
 Local Union No. 
 
 Price 
 
 256 
 
 Seattle 
 
 131, 178, I78br2, 382, 
 
 
 252, 432 
 
 Tacoma 
 
 380, 338 
 
 Everett 
 
 248 
 
 Spokane 
 
 315 
 
 Port Angeles 
 
 316 
 
 Ballard 
 
 317 
 
 Superior 
 
 10 
 
 Clarksburg 
 
 575 
 
 Fairmont 
 
 576 
 
 m 
 
 4 
 
■saM 
 
 r> ! 
 
 
 THE REFERENCE NOTES OF CITATIONS 
 
 CHAFna I 
 I— Walter Weyl, "The New Democracy." 
 
 Chapter II 
 
 I— A. F. of L. Constitution, Preamble in Report of Conven- 
 tion, 1913. 
 
 2— "The Leather Worker," April, 1913 
 3— A. F. of L., op. cit. Art. X, Sec. 1. 
 
 Chapter III 
 
 i~?*i35* T' "%*"^^"^C Eleventh Biennial Convention. 
 2— Arbitration Board Report, "In the matter of the con- 
 troversy between the B. of L. E. and the Eastern 
 Railroads,' 1912, pp. 1 19-120. 
 
 Alriul' 5"'r " ""* ^*^''« Bulletin No. 98, Jan., 1912, pp. 5-6. 
 c""r T F ;?TT"1f- J W''.^ Adminstration," p. 125. 
 ^B. L. E. & L. F. & E "Joint Agreement," 1913, p. 7. 
 0— Eastern Association of General Committees of O R. C 
 & B. R. T. Report, 1913, p. 13. 
 
 Chapter IV 
 
 I— Vincent St. John, " History of the I. W. W. " p. 28. 
 2 — Ibid., pp. 8-9. 
 
 3--Vincent St. John, "Industrial Unionism," p. 6. 
 4— Ibid., p. 5. 
 
 S— Daniel De Uon, Report of Convention, 1906, pp. 330-331 
 6-Vincent St. John, "History of the I. W. W/' p 25 
 
 Chapter VI 
 
 1— Samuel Gompers "Woman's Work" in the "American 
 I^ederationist, ' Aug., 1913, pp. 625-627. 
 
 266 
 
 REFERENCE NOTES 
 
 Chapter VII 
 
 267 
 
 I— A F. of L. Report of Convention, 1912, pp. 114-115. 
 
 2— A. F. of L. Building Trades Department. Report of Con- 
 vention, 1912, p. 63. T^ . r r- 
 
 3«_A. F. of L., Metal Trades Department. Report of Con- 
 vention, 1913, p. 16. 
 
 4 — Ibid., p. 16. 
 
 5 — Ibid., p. 12. 
 
 6 — Ibid., p. 30- . , x^ . ^ 
 
 7__A. F. of L., Railway Employees' Department, Constitu- 
 tion, p. 3- 
 8— Letter to Helen Marot. . ^ ^ » 
 
 ^-Herman Schluter, "The Brewing Industry, p. 219. 
 
 10— Ibid., p. 227. 
 II— Ibid., p. 228. 
 
 Chapter VIII 
 
 I— E. R. A. Seligman, "The Crisis in Colorado," in the 
 "Annalist," 4th May, 1914. 
 
 Chapter X 
 
 I— Court of Appeals Decision, District of Columbia, nth 
 
 March, 1909. . « ^ r - ^• 
 
 2— A. F. of L. " Buck Stove and Range Company. Injunction 
 
 suits," pph., pp. 19-20. 
 3— Frank L. MulhoUand, in A. F. of L. Convention Report, 
 
 1912, pp. 277-279. 
 4— Supreme Court of Montana, 96, Pacific Reporter, 127. 
 
 Chapter XI 
 
 I— Arbitration Board Report, "In the matter of the contro- 
 versy between the B. of L. E. and the Eastern Rail- 
 roads," 1912, pp. 107-108. 
 2— Ibid. (Mr. Morrisy), pp. 121-122. . ^, 
 
 3— Andrew Furuseth in "Locomotive Firemen s Magazine, 
 
 Aug., 1913, P- 257- _ , . . „ A -1 
 
 4— Samuel Gompers, "American Federationist, April, 1914, 
 
 pp. 316-317. 
 
 Chapter XII 
 
 I— Samuel Gompers, "American Federationist," April, I9I4» 
 
 P- 316. . ^ . ^ 
 
 2— A. F. of L. Report of Convention, 1913, P- 03- 
 
', 
 
 ! I 
 I 
 
 iM 
 
 I* 
 
 4 
 
 s 
 
 i] 
 
 i^ 
 
 268 
 
 REFERENCE NOTES 
 
 a-Samuel Gompers, News Letter," loth Jan., 1914. 
 ^ ^:^ i* • ' V^SisIative Committee, Report in " American 
 
 „ Federationist," April, 1913, pp. 294-296. ^"^"^^^ 
 
 5— American Federationist," Sept., 1913. 
 
 Chapter XIII 
 
 i-Magistrate Campbell in Chief Magistrates Court, sec " New 
 York Times," 8th March, 1914. 
 
 Chapter XIV 
 
 i~:^x^• °^ h ,^?Port ?f Convention, 1912, p. 144. 
 
 2- Typographical Journal," Jan, 1914, pp. 3.4. 
 
 3— Amalgamated Journal of the A. of I. S T W oth 
 
 Jan., 1913. • '■■ *''•' y'" 
 
 4-Anton Johannsen, see " The Survey," ist Feb., 1913, p. 615. 
 
 Chapter XV 
 
 i~" The Globe," New York, 9th July, 1913 
 2— John Walker, in "Locomotive Firemen's Magazine" Oct 
 1913, p. 549. ' 
 
 3— A. F. of L. Convention Report, 1912, p. 149. 
 
 Chapter XVI 
 
 i—Arturo Giovannitti in Emile Pouget. " Sabotage," pp. 13-14. 
 2-James Warbasse ' Sabotage " pamphlet reprinted and re- 
 
 vised from " The Call," New York. 
 3— Arturo Giovannitti, op. cit, p. 15. 
 4--Ibid., p. 15. 
 
 5— "Jersey Justice," pph., p. i. 
 O— Arturo Giovannitti, op. cit., pp. 28-29. 
 
 Chapter XVIII 
 
 i-Frederick W Taylor, in " Dartmouth College Conference 
 
 ^^, on Scientific Management," p. 32. 
 2— Ibid., pp. 32-35. 
 3 — Ibid., p. 21. 
 
 4 — H. E. Slayton in op. cit., p. 222. 
 5 — H. L. Gant, in op. cit., p. 222. 
 
 u\^' "^^y^o^' op. cit., p. 31. 
 7— American Medicine," April, 1913, p. 199. 
 
 IlEFERENCE NOTES 
 
 Chapter XIX 
 
 269 
 
 i_A. F. of L. Convention Report, 1912, p. 146. 
 
 3— Washington State Federation of Labor, Convention Re- 
 port, 1913, P- 23. 
 
INDEX 
 
 i« 
 
 Agreements. See Wage agree- 
 ments. 
 Amalganiation, Metal trades, 
 89, 92, 95; Miners Unions, 
 98; see also Industrial or 
 trade unionism, jurisdiction. 
 American Federation of Labor, 
 Chap. II; autonomy of m- 
 ternationals, 16-20, 98-99 ; 
 amalgamation, 89, 92, 95, 9° ; 
 boycott, Chap. X; class 
 action, 13-14. 18-19 Uee also 
 Industrial or trade unionism, 
 Sympathetic action) ; conven- 
 tions, 16; executive council, 
 24; federation, 15; "Federa- 
 tion of federations," 95-97; 
 federal unions, 21 ; I. W. Vf., 
 criticism of, 57-58; industrial 
 unionism. Chap. V; inter- 
 national unions, 16-20 (see 
 also Autonomy, Jurisdic- 
 tion) ; jurisdiction, 16-17, 84- 
 87, 95; 101-105; label. Chap. 
 IX, 23; legislation. Chap. 
 XII; limitation of output. 
 Chap. XVII; local unions, 
 16, 20-21; partnership rela- 
 tions, 11-12, 18-19; political 
 action. Chap. XIX; and 
 Socialism, 13, 243-244; state 
 branches, 25-26; statistics of 
 unions, 15-16; tax, 16; trade 
 departments, 22, 85-98 ; union 
 shop. Chap. VIII; violence, 
 191 -193 ; wage agreements, 
 27, 255-266; women's organi- 
 zation, 65-67, 69, 76-77- 
 Apprenticeship regulations, 225- 
 
 228. 
 Arbitration, Chap. XI; Cana- 
 dian Disputes Act, I55-I57; 
 Erdman Act, 37. 149-iSo; 
 
 Locomotive engineers award, 
 150-152; New Zealand and 
 Australia, I57-I59; Newlands 
 Act, 154-155 ; Railroad broth- 
 erhoods, 36-38; State boards 
 
 of, 178. 
 
 Aristocracy of labor, 115-110; 
 high dues, 54; limited, 228. 
 
 Autonomy, A. F. of L. inter- 
 nationals, 16-20; of electrical 
 workers, loo-ioi ; printing 
 trades, 98-99 ; building trades, 
 86-89; metal trades, 89-95; 
 I. W. W., opposition to, 58- 
 59, 61-62. 
 
 Blacklist, employers' boycott, 
 
 136. 
 
 Boot and Shoe Workers, op- 
 position to class action, 18; 
 use of label, 131. 
 
 Boycott, Chap. X; A. F. of L. 
 committee on, 138-140; basis 
 for its use, 136; Buck Stove 
 and Range Co., 137 ; conspir- 
 acy decisions, 145; bill op- 
 posing conspiracy interpreta- 
 tion, 168-169; Danbury Hat- 
 ters, 140-144; Halloway opin- 
 ion, 145-146; Montana deci- 
 sion, 145; secondary boycott, 
 147; Van Orsdel opinion, 
 
 137-138. 
 
 Brewery Workers, Socialist 
 sentiment, 13 ; industrial 
 unionism of, 101-106; juris- 
 diction of, 102-105. 
 
 Bricklayers' union, 226. 
 
 Bridge and Structural Iron 
 Workers, union shop, 124; 
 dynamite conspiracy, 184- 
 186, 190-197. 
 
 
 ^ill 
 
 271 
 
272 
 
 INDEX 
 
 li 
 
 Buck Stove and Range Co., 
 
 137-138, 165. 
 Building Trades Department 
 
 (A. F. of L.), 22, 85-89. 
 
 Canadian Disputes Act, 155* 
 157. 
 
 Chicago Federation of Labor, 
 14, 20. 
 
 Cigar Makers' Union, in Colo- 
 rado miners' strike, 118; 
 women packers, 66. 
 
 Citizen alliances, 214. 
 
 Class action {see Sympathetic 
 action), A. F. of L., 13-14; 
 industrial unionism may 
 mean, no; Boot and Shoe 
 Workers' opposition to, 18; 
 I. W. W. position, 49-58, 
 109- 1 10; Railroad brother- 
 hood position, 29-31, 45. 
 
 Closed shop. See Union shop. 
 
 Compulsory arbitration. See 
 Arbitration. 
 
 Conductors. See Order of 
 Railroad Conductors. 
 
 Contracts. See Wage agree- 
 ments. 
 
 Court injunctions, federal bill 
 opposing, 168; orders of re- 
 straint, 170; state legislation, 
 179; Montana federation, 
 145 ; A. F. of L. officers, 167. 
 
 Courts, The, labor's conflict 
 with, Chap. XIII; dynamite 
 case, 184-186; prejudice of 
 judges, 183-184, 186; free 
 speech, 187 ; decisions in boy- 
 cott cases, 137-147; opposi- 
 tion to interpretation of 
 trusts, 142-144, 165-170; Pat- 
 erson strike. 204. 
 
 Direct action, Chap. XX, 56. 
 
 Electrical Workers, opposition 
 
 to industrial action, 100. 
 Erdman Act, 37-38; 149-150. 
 
 Federation, A. F. of L., federal 
 plan of organization, 15-26; 
 
 A. F. of L. railroad em- 
 ployees, 95-97 ; Railroad 
 brotherhoods, development 
 of, 42-45. 
 Firemen. See Railroad broth- 
 erhoods. 
 
 Guards. See Strikebreakers. 
 Gunmen. See Strikebreakers. 
 
 Hatters* union. See United 
 hatters. 
 
 Hotel and Restaurant Em- 
 ployees' union, 83. 
 
 Industrial or trade unionism, 
 Chap. VI; in A. F. of L., 
 82-85 ; Brewery workers, 102- 
 105; as class action, iio; in 
 I. W. W., 48-50, 53-54. 108- 
 109; Metal workers, 90- 
 95; Miners', 98, 101-102; 
 Light, heat, and power coun- 
 cil, 99-100; and Sympathetic 
 action, 112- 119. 
 
 Industrial Workers of the 
 World, Chap. IV; attitude 
 towards A. F. of L., 57-58; 
 autonomy opposition, 58-59, 
 61-62 ; class action, 50-58, 108- 
 109; centralization, 61 ; direct 
 or political action, 56, 251-252 ; 
 industrialism of, 48-50, 53- 
 54, 58-63, 108-109; Law- 
 rence strike, 188-189, 205-206; 
 mass picketing, 205 ; member- 
 ship, 63 ; Paterson strike, 203- 
 204; and Socialism, 51; and 
 Syndicalism, 51-52; short 
 strike, 55; sabotage, 215-216, 
 219-221 ; unskilled workers, 
 56, 63; violence, 188-190, 204; 
 and women's organization, 
 68, 70, 74- 
 
 Injunctions. See Court injunc- 
 tions. 
 
 Insurance, Railroad brother- 
 hoods, 33-35. 
 
 Journeymen Tailors, Socialist 
 sentiment, 13. 
 
 INDEX 
 
 273 
 
 Jurisdiction, in A. F. of L., 16- 
 17, 84-85, loi, 112-113; build- 
 ing trades, 86-87; Brewery 
 Workers, 102-106; Metal 
 trades, 94-95 ; Miners, 102. 
 
 Label, The, Chap. IX; defini- 
 tion of, 129-130; where suc- 
 cessful, 131-132; demand a 
 duty, 132; difficulties of, 133; 
 an ethical proposition, 134; 
 United Garment Workers, 
 131; Cigar Makers, 131; 
 Boot and Shoe, 131; Metal 
 Polishers, 133 ; Musicians, 
 
 Ladies' Garment Workers, 75- 
 Lawrence strike, 188-189, 205. 
 Leather Workers' Union, atti- 
 tude towards class action, 18. 
 Legislation, Labor, Chap. XII ; 
 attitude towards, 162; A. F. 
 of L. indorsement of, 171- 
 179; attitude towards Aus- 
 tralasian, 163 ; minimum 
 wage, 164, 178; opposition to 
 interpretation of trusts, 142- 
 144, 165-170; immigration, 
 170; workmen's compensa- 
 tion, 175 ; employers' liability, 
 175; on health, 176; on 
 safety, 170, 176; convict la- 
 bor, 176; "loan shark," I77; 
 on mining, I77; o" hours, 
 177; on women, 164, I77. 
 178; child labor, 178; wage 
 payments, 178; employment 
 bureaus, 178; trades disputes, 
 178; arbitration boards, 178; 
 labor bureaus, 179; anti-in- 
 junction, 179; direct legisla- 
 tion, 179. _ 
 Light, Heat and Power Coun- 
 cil of California, 99-100. 
 Limitation of output. Chap. 
 XVII; by capital, 222-223; 
 Textile Workers' experience, 
 223-225; regulation of ap- 
 prentices, 225-228; Brick- 
 layers', 226; Typographical, 
 
 227; I. W. W. attitude to- 
 wards, 228. 
 
 Local trades councils, of metal 
 trades, 92, 93; oi building 
 trades, 86. 
 
 Locomotive Engineers. See 
 Railroad brotherhoods. 
 
 Locomotive firemen and en- 
 ginemen. See Railroad broth- 
 erhoods. 
 
 Longshoremen's Unions 83. 
 
 Machinists' Union, Socialist 
 sentiment, 13 ; sympathetic 
 action, 95. 
 
 McNamara brothers, 188, 190- 
 
 198. , ^ , 
 
 Metal Polishers' Union, label 
 
 position, 133 ; sympathetic 
 
 action, 92. 
 Metal trades councils, 92-94- 
 Metal trades department, 22, 
 
 90-95. 
 Militia in strikes, 201, 203; 
 
 Lawrence strike, 189, 205; 
 
 Calumet strike, 209-210; in 
 
 Colorado, 212-213. 
 Minimum wage, 164, 178. 
 Mining department, 23, 97-98. 
 Molders' Union, on union shop, 
 
 123; failure in strike, 93-94- 
 Montana Federation of Labor, 
 
 145. 
 Musicians' Union, use of label, 
 
 133- 
 
 National Erectors' Association, 
 185-186, 191, 194-195. 197. 
 
 National Manufacturers' Asso- 
 ciation, 137, 191. 
 
 Newlands amendment, i54-i55' 
 
 Open shop. See Union shop. 
 Order of Railway Conductors. 
 See Railroad brotherhoods. 
 
 Partnership relations, 11, 18, 
 134; union shop, 120; Rail- 
 road brotherhoods' identity 
 of interests, 31-32; boycott, 
 
274 
 
 INDEX 
 
 136; see also Wage agree- 
 ments; in opposition to, see 
 Class action, Sympathetic ac- 
 tion. 
 
 Paterson Silk Workers' strike, 
 203-204. 
 
 Philanthropy, Chap. I. 
 
 Picketing, Chap. XV ; the right 
 of, 200; as " disturbance," 201- 
 203; mass, 205; police and 
 military interference, 198- 
 201, 203-206, 209-210, 212; in 
 Paterson strike, 203-204; in 
 Lawrence strike, 188-189, 
 205; in New York, 206; atti- 
 tude of Railroad brother- 
 hoods, 46. 
 
 Police officers in strikes, 201, 
 203 ; arbitrary arrests in Pat- 
 erson, 204; in clothing 
 trades, 206. 
 
 Political action. Chap. XIX; 
 attitude of I. W. W., 56; 
 A. F. of L. and the S. P., 
 243-244, 246; A. F. of L. in 
 practical politics, 245-246 ; 
 Washington State Federa- 
 tion, 247; see also Direct ac- 
 tion. 
 
 Preferential shop, 128. 
 
 Printing Pressmen, strike, 14, 
 98. 
 
 Railroad brotherhoods. Chap. 
 Ill ; opposition to class ac- 
 tion, 29-32; conservatism of, 
 30-32, 35; insurance feature, 
 33-35 ; " protective policy," 
 34-38 ; territorial divisions, 
 39-40 ; federation, 42-45 ; 
 standardization, 40-41 ; arbi- 
 tration, 36-38, 149-155; Erd- 
 man Act, 37-38; Newlands' 
 Act, 155; picketing, 46; 
 strikes, 35, 36, 44-45- 
 
 Railroad employees' depart- 
 ment, 22, 95-97» 
 
 Railway Trainmen. See Rail- 
 road brotherhoods. 
 
 Sabotage, Chap. XVI; defini- 
 tion, 215-217; I. W. W. ad- 
 vocacy, 219. 
 
 San Francisco Labor Council, 
 20. 
 
 Scab, The, 121 ; official scab- 
 bing, 100. 
 
 Scientific management. Chap. 
 XVIII; A. F. of L. and I. 
 W. W. attitude, 231 ; " fou^ 
 principles of," 232-233; a 
 workman's capital, 234; ini- 
 tiative, 238-239 ; wasted effort, 
 239-240 ; increase in produc- 
 tion, 240-241. 
 
 Sherman Anti-trust law, its ap- 
 plication to unions, 165-168; 
 in Hatters' case, 140-144; 
 proposed revision, 168-169. 
 
 Social reform. See Philan- 
 thropy. 
 
 Socialism, in A. F. of L., 13, 
 243-244, 246; relation of I. 
 W. W. to, 51; in Miners' 
 Unions, 109. 
 
 Strikebreakers, professional, in 
 Calumet strike, 209-210; in 
 Colorado strike, 212-213; as 
 thugs, 206 ; as private guards, 
 203 ; importation of, 201 ; 
 agents of employers, 207; 
 anarchy of guards, 212; as 
 militiamen, 189, 212-213. 
 
 Sympathetic action, Chap. VII; 
 and amalgamation, 114; 
 building trades, 88; coal 
 miners' experience, 114-115; 
 Colorado strike, 118-119; and 
 industrialism, 111-112, 114- 
 115; I. W. W. purpose, 53- 
 55 ; Light, Heat, and Power, 
 Council, 99-100; Metal 
 trades, 89, 92-95, 117; print- 
 ing trades failure, 98-99 ; rail- 
 road employees, 95; see also 
 class action ; for opposition to, 
 see Autonomy ; Aristocracy 
 of labor; Wage agreements; 
 Railroad brotherhoods, 44-45. 
 
 Syndicalism, 51-52. 
 
 INDEX 
 
 275 
 
 Trade agreements. SeeW&gt 
 agreements. 
 
 Trade unionism. See Indus- 
 trialism or Trade unionism. 
 
 Trainmen. See Railroad broth- 
 erhoods. 
 
 Trusts. See Sherman Anti- 
 trust law. 
 
 Typographical Union, attitude 
 towards class action, 14; in 
 Colorado strike, 118; in 
 Pressmen's strike, 98; union 
 shop, 123. 
 
 Union membership, preface iii. 
 
 Union recognition, Chap. VIII ; 
 definition of, 120; Miners' 
 demand in Colorado for, 124- 
 127. 
 
 Union shop, Chap. VIII; defi- 
 nition of, 120; the scab, 121; 
 attitude of Railroad brother- 
 hoods, 122 ; attitude of I. W. 
 W., 122; demand for, varies 
 in A. F. of L., 123. 
 
 United Hatters; boycott case, 
 140-144. 
 
 United Mine Workers, So- 
 cialist sentiment in, 13; as 
 an industrial union, 101-102, 
 106; jurisdiction, 102; Colo- 
 rado strike, 210-213; union 
 recognition, 124-127 ; sym- 
 pathetic strike experience, 
 114, 118; indicted under trust 
 law, 165-166; West Virginia 
 strike, 207, 210, 212. 
 
 Unskilled labor, I. W. W. con- 
 cerned with, 56, 63; lack of 
 sympathy between skilled 
 and, 1 1 5- 1 18; position of 
 craftsmen weakened, no; 
 women as, 68; and perma- 
 nent unions, 69-70. 
 
 Violence, Chaps. XIV, XV; 
 relation of I. W. W. to, 188- 
 190 ; McNamara brothers, 
 188, 190-191, 193, 195-198; 
 Bridge and Structural Iron 
 Workers, 190-197 ; Na- 
 
 tional Erectors* Associa- 
 tion, 191, I94-I95» 197; Na- 
 tional Manufacturers' Asso- 
 ciation, 191 ; attitude of A. F. 
 of L. towards, 191-193; of 
 capital, 189, 191, 193-194, 
 198; police and militia, 189- 
 190, 198-199, 201, 203-206, 
 209-210, 212-213 ; Paterson 
 strike, 203-204 ; Lawrence 
 strike, 189, 205; West Vir- 
 ginia strike, 207, 210, 212; 
 Calumet strike, 207-210; 
 Colorado strike, 210-214. 
 
 Wage agreements, A. F. of L. 
 statistics of, 27, 255-266; A. 
 F. of L. attitude towards, 14, 
 
 88-89, 93-94, 98-99, 107-108; 
 Western Federation, change 
 of policy, 109; and Brother- 
 hoods, 38-42; and industrial- 
 ism, 88, iio-iii; conflict with 
 sympathetic action, 88, 113- 
 114; label agreements, 130- 
 131 ; see Partnership rela- 
 tions. 
 Washington State Federation, 
 
 247. 
 
 Welfare work, attitude of labor 
 towards. See Philanthropy. 
 
 Western Federation of Miners, 
 Socialist sentiment, 13; in- 
 dustrialism, 101-102, 106; 
 change in policy, 109; Calu- 
 met strike, 207-210. 
 
 Women, Organization of, 
 Chap. V; question of dis- 
 crimination, 65-67 ; relation 
 of women as unskilled work- 
 ers to, 68-70; influence of 
 domestic attitude, 71-73 ; 
 women as strikers, 74; I. W. 
 W. attitude towards, 68, 70, 
 74; A. F. of L. attitude to- 
 wards, 65-67, 69, 77. 
 
 Women's Trade Union League, 
 75, 76. 
 
 Yellowstone Trade and Labor 
 Assembly, 145. 
 
11 
 
 sg^mtim' 
 
 NEW BOOKS ON THE LIVING ISSUES BY LIVING 
 
 MEN AND WOMEN 
 
 The Home University Library 
 
 Cloth Bound 50c per volume net ; by mail 56c. 
 Points about THE HOME UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 Every volume is absolutely new, and specially written for 
 
 the Library. There are no reprints. ^ ^ ^ .„ . .• 
 Every volume is sold separately. Each has illustrations 
 
 where needed, and contains a Bibliography as an aid to 
 
 further study. . . .. -^ •«.„ 
 
 Every volume is written by a recognized authority on its 
 subject, and the Library is published under the direction of 
 four eminent Anglo-Saxon scholars — Gilbert Murray, ot 
 Oxford ; H. A. L. Fisher, of Oxford ; J. Arthur Thomson, 
 of Aberdeen; and Prof. W. T. Brewster, c£ Columbia 
 
 Every subject is of living and permanent interest. Thes^e 
 books tell whatever is most important and interesting about 
 their subjects. , « i. • 
 
 Each volume is complete and independent; but the series 
 has been carefully planned as a whole to form a compre- 
 hensive library of modern knowledge covering the chief sub- 
 jects in History and Geography, Literature and Art, bcience. 
 Social Science, Philosophy, and Religion. An order for any 
 volume will insure receiving announcements of future issues. 
 
 SOME COMMENTS ON THE SERIES AS A WHOLE: 
 
 -'Excellent."— Tfc* Outlook. "Exceedingly worth while."— Tfce Nation, 
 
 -The excellence of these hooks."— The Dial ^ ^^ 
 
 •'So large a proportion with marked individuality. — New xotk oi»». 
 
 VOLUMES ON SOCIAL 
 
 The Newspaper 
 
 By G. B. Dibbles. 
 Liberalum 
 
 By L. T. Hobhouse. 
 TIm ElemenU of PoUtical 
 
 Economy 
 
 By S. J. Chapman. 
 The Socialist Movement 
 
 By J. R. Macdonald. 
 The Science of Wealth 
 
 By J. A. HoBSON. 
 
 SCIENCE NOW READY 
 
 The School 
 
 By J. J. FiNDLAY. 
 
 The Stock Exchange 
 By F. W. Hirst. 
 
 Parliament 
 
 By C. P. Ilbert. 
 
 The ETolution of Industry 
 By D. H. Macgregor. 
 
 Elements of English Law 
 By W. M. Geldart. 
 
 HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 
 
 34 Wbst 33d Strmt (ui'13) NEW YORK 
 
\vi 
 
 '■)\ 
 
 BOOKS ON SOCIAL SCIENCE 
 
 SOCIAUSM AND DEMOCRACY IN EUROPE 
 
 By Samuel P. Orth. With bibliography and "Programs'* 
 of the various Socialist parties. $1.50 net. 
 
 Traces briefly the growth of the Socialist movement in 
 France, Belgium, Germany, England, and attempts to determine 
 the relation of economic and political Socialism to Democracy. 
 
 MARXISM VERSUS SOCIALISM 
 
 By V. G. SiMKHOViTCH, Professor of Political Science, Col- 
 umbia University. $1.50 net. 
 
 A thorough and intimate account of all the intricate theories, 
 problems and difficulties of modern Socialism. 
 
 Professor Simkhovitch shows us that the economic tendencies 
 of to-day are quite different from what Marx expected them to 
 be and that Socialism from the standpoint of Marx's own 
 theory is quite impossible. 
 
 WHY WOMEN ARE SO 
 
 By Mary Roberts Coolidge. $1.50 net. 
 
 "A fearless discussion of the modern woman, her inheritance, her 
 present and her more promising future. The eighteenth and nineteenth 
 century woman is keenly analyzed and compared with the highest type 
 of woman to-day."— /4. L A. Booklist. '*^ 
 
 A MONTESSORI MOTHER 
 
 By Dorothy Canfield Fisher. With Illustrations. $1.25 net 
 A simple untechnical account of the apparatus, the method 
 of Its application, and a clear statement of the principles un- 
 derlying its use. 
 
 d <>^?* r^*****"'* ^°^ " ^* ^*** ^* ^*^* *««o on the subject"— 7»- 
 
 THE SOCIALIST MOVEMENT (Home Univertity Ubrary) 
 
 By J. Ramsay Macdonald, Chairman of the British Labor 
 Party. 50 cents net. 
 
 Traces the development of Socialistic theory, practice, and 
 party organization ; with a summary of the progress of Socialist 
 parties to date in the leading nations. 
 
 "Not only the latest authoritative exposition of Socialism, it is also 
 
 tie most moderate, restrained and winning presentation of the subject 
 
 now before the public."— ^an Francisco Argonaut, •uojcw 
 
 HENRY 
 PUBLISHERS 
 
 HOLT AND 
 
 <V13) 
 
 COMPANY 
 NEW YORK 
 
 Hmerican public problems Series 
 
 Edited by Ralph Cuetis Ringwalt 
 
 Chinese Immigration 
 
 By Mary Roberts Coolidge, Formerly Associate Professor 
 of Sociology in Stanford University. 531 pp., $i.75 iiet; by 
 xail, $1.90. {/us/ issued.) 
 
 Presents the most comprehensive record of the Chinaman in 
 the United States that has yet been attempted. 
 
 "Scholarly. Covers every important phase, economic, social, and 
 
 golitical, of the Chinese question in America down to the San Francisco 
 re in 1906."— AVw York Sun. 
 
 ** Statesmanlike. Of intense interest."— /^art/br^f Courant. 
 "A remarkably thorough historical study. Timely and useful. En- 
 hanced by the abundant array of documentary facts and evidence."— 
 Chicago Kecord- Herald. 
 
 Immigration: And Its Effects Upon the United 
 States 
 
 By Prescott F. Hall, A.B., LL.B, Secretary of the Immi- 
 gration Restriction League. 393 pp. $1.50 net; by mail, $1.65. 
 
 " Should prove interestinj? to everyone. Very readable, forceful and 
 convincing. Mr. Hall considers every possible phase of this great 
 question and does it in a masterly way tliat shows not only that he 
 tnoroughly understands it, but that he is deeply interested in it and has 
 studied everything bearing upon it.^'— Boston Transcript- 
 
 " A readable work containing a vast amount of valuable information. 
 Especially to be commended is the discussion of the racial efifects. As a 
 trustworthy general guide it should prove a god-send." — New York 
 Evening Post. 
 
 The EUection of Senators 
 
 By Professor George H. Haynes, Author of *• Representation 
 in State Legislatures." 300 pp. $1.50 net; by mail, $1.65. 
 
 Shows the historical reasons for the present method, and 
 
 its effect on the Senate and Senators, and on state and local 
 
 government, with a detailed review of the arguments for and 
 
 against direct election. 
 
 "A timely book. . . . Prof. Haynes is qualified for a historical and 
 analytical treatise on the subject of the Senate."— AVw York Evening Sun, 
 
 HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 
 
 S* WEST S3o STREET NEW YORK 
 

 li 
 
 f 
 
 ■.\ 
 
 STANDARD BOOKS IN ECONOMICS 
 
 BUCHER'S INDUSTRIAL EVOLUTION 
 
 Translated by Dr. S. M. Wickett, Lecturer in Toronto Univer- 
 •ity. 398 pp. 8vo. $2.50. 
 
 The Ontlook :— A work of prime importance to economic students. While 
 German in tlie thoroughness of its scholarship, it is almost Gallic in its style, 
 and is, for the most part, decidedly interesting reading. 
 
 CLARK: THE LABOR MOVEMENT IN AUSTRALASIA 
 
 By Victor S. Clark. 827 pp. 12mo. |1.50 net. 
 
 Qnartarly Journal of Economics :— A valuable work based upon investi.. 
 gallon m the field. Treats judicially the variousaspectsof the Australian labor 
 movement and estimates critically its significance. 
 
 HOLLANDER AND BARNETT: STUDIES IN AMERICAN 
 
 TRADE UNIONISM 
 
 Edited by J. H. Hollander and G. E. Barnett, Professors 
 in Johns Hopkins University. 880 pp. 8vo. $2.76 net. 
 
 Twelve papers by graduate students and officers of Johns 
 Hopkins University, the results of original investigations. 
 
 McPHERSON : THE WORKING OF THE RAILROADS 
 
 By Logan G. McPherson. 278 pp. 12mo. $1.50 net. 
 Simply and lucidly tells what a railroad company is, what ft 
 does, and how it does it. 
 
 MORE'S WAGE-EARNERS' BUDGETS 
 
 A Study of Standards and Cost of Living in New York City. 
 By Louise B. More. With a preface by Professor F. H. Gid- 
 DINGS. 280 pp. 8vo. $2.50 net. 
 
 A report of the first investigation carried on under the direc- 
 tion of the Committee on Social Investigations at Greenwich 
 House, a social settlement on the lower West Side of New York 
 City, among workingmen's families of different races and occu- 
 pations. 
 
 ZARTMAN: THE INVESTMENTS OF LIFE INSURANCE 
 
 COMPANIES 
 
 By Lester W. Zartman, Instructor in Yale University. 
 259 pp. 12mo. $1.25 net. 
 
 It analyzes investments and the earning power of the various 
 assets of life insurance companies. The interest rate is calculated 
 by a new and exact method. The author also discusses the rela- 
 tions of the investments to social welfare, and the proper control 
 of the immense assets of the companies. 
 
 TEXT-BOOKS IN ECONOMICS 
 
 ADAMS'S SCIENCE OF FINANCE 
 
 Br Bbnrt 0. Adams. Professor in the Univeraity of MichigMt 
 678 pp 8vo. (American Science Series.) fd.uu. 
 
 Edwin B A SeUjrman, Columbia University, in "Political Science Quar- 
 teSJ^wll at onc^TWmand attention as a lasting contribut onto ^ 
 Zlc \JrLe. ... It is perhaps no exaggeration to say tbjt ^ro ^ 
 aZm is at the head of those American scholars who have grasped the essen- 
 t2r^u?u of monindustrial life ; and it is likewise no exaggeration to chum 
 lor this volume the distinction of being one of the most original, themostsn^ 
 ^tive. and most brUliant productions that have made their appearance in 
 ncent decades. 
 
 DANIELS'S ELEMENTS OF PUBUC FINANCE 
 ByWmTHROP More DAmEjLS Professor of Political Econ- 
 omy in Princeton University. 878 pp. 12mo. $1.50. 
 
 f Snenoer Baldwin, Professor in Boston University :-It is a piece of 
 work t^Xe borhTrom a scientific and a literary point of view-a tex^b<^k 
 r^ a stvle The lucid explanation of the financial system of the 
 
 Ct^ SUtos 'm^^ the book part^ularly valuable for the American studeaL 
 
 SCOTTS MONEY AND BANKING 
 
 By W A. Scott, Professor in the University of Wisconsin. 
 Revised.* 377 pp. 8vo. $2.00. 
 
 W E Mills Professor in Vassar College :-It is clear, comprehensive, and 
 cote^'atlvT^All in all. It seems to me the best single book to use in con- 
 nectlon with a course on Money and Banking. 
 
 SEAGER'S PRINCIPLES OF ECONOMICS 
 
 By Henry R. Seager. Professor in Colunabia Univers||E7. 
 Fourth Edition of Introduction to Economics. Revised and il^n- 
 larged. 642 pp. 8vo. $2.25. 
 
 David Kinley, University of niinols:-It shows improvement with every 
 edition and it always was a first-class book. 
 
 SEAGER'S ECONOMICS. BRIEFER COURSE 
 
 By Henry R. Seager, Professor in Columbia University. 
 467 pp. Large 12mo. $1.75. 
 
 Intended primarily for those who wish to give only that amount 
 of attention to economic theory that is essential to the intelli- 
 gent discussion of practical economic problems. 
 
 HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 
 
 34 Wert 33d Street New Yak 
 
 HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 
 
 34 Wert 33d Street ^ew Y«k 
 
fli! 
 
 I I 
 
 feu 
 
 •• > 
 
 ,1 
 
 LEADING AMERICANS 
 
 Edited by W. P. Trent, and generally confined to those no 
 
 longer living. Large i2mo. With portraits. 
 
 Each $1.75, by mail $1.90. 
 
 R. M. JOHNSTON'S LEADING AMERICAN SOLDIERS 
 
 By the Author of "Napoleon," etc. 
 
 Washington, Greene, Taylor, Scott, Andrew Jackson, Grant, 
 Sherman, Sheridan, McClellan, Meade, Lee, "Stonewall" 
 Jackson, Joseph E. Johnston. 
 
 " Very interesting . . . much sound originality of treatment, and the 
 style is very clear." — Springfield Republican. 
 
 JOHN ERSKINE'S LEADING AMERICAN NOVEUSTS 
 
 Charles Brockden Brown, Cooper, Simms, Hawthorne, 
 Mrs. Stowe, and Bret Harte. 
 
 " He makes his study of these novelists all the more striking because 
 of their contrasts of style and their varied purpose. . . . Well worth 
 any amount of time we may care to spend upon them." — Boston Tran- 
 script. 
 
 W. M. PAYNE'S LEADING AMERICAN ESSAYISTS 
 
 A General Introduction dealing with essay writing in Amer- 
 ica, and biographies of Irving, Emerson, Thoreau, and George 
 William Curtis. 
 
 " It is necessary to know only the name of the author of this work 
 to be assured of its literary excellence." — Literary Digest. 
 
 LEADING AMERICAN MEN OF SCIENCE 
 
 Edited by President David Starr Jordan. 
 
 Count Rumford and Josiah Willard Gibbs, by E. E. Slosson; 
 Alexander Wilson and Audubon, by Witmer Stone; Silliman, by 
 Daniel C. Gilman; Joseph Henry, by Simon Newcomb; Louis Agassiz 
 and Spencer Fullerton Baird, by Charles F. Holder; Jeffries Wyman, 
 by B. G. Wilder; Asa Gray, by John M. Coulter; James Dwight Dana, 
 by William North Rice; Marsh, by Geo. Bird Grinnell; Edward 
 Drinker Cope, by Marcus Benjamin; Simon Newcomb, by Marcus 
 Benjamin; George Brown Goode, by D. S. Jordan; Henry Augustus 
 Rowland, by Ira Remsen; William Keith Brooks, by E. A. Andrews. 
 
 GEORGE ILES'S LEADING AMERICAN INVENTORS 
 
 By the author of " Inventors at Work," etc. Colonel John Stevens 
 (screw-propeller, etc.); his son, Robert (Trail, etc.); Fulton; Erics- 
 son; Whitney; Blanchard (lathe); McCormick; Howe; (Goodyear; 
 Morse; Tilghman (paper from wood and sand blast); Sholes (type, 
 writer); and Mergenthaler (linotype). 
 
 Other Volumes covering Lawyers, Poets, Statesmen, 
 Editors, Explorers, etc. , arranged for. Leaflet on application. 
 
 HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 
 
 PUBUSHERS ax -la) NEW YORK 
 
 \ 
 
 
 ! 
 
 V -it J 
 
1^ 
 
 ,^^il--3if ... 
 
 Date Due 
 
 flH^V.C 
 
 
 
 MAk: 
 
 li 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 OLCli 
 
 
 
 
 «FP 1 ? 1J"«' ' 
 
 % 
 
 
 
 
 - ^ 
 
 c — : — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 9 
 
 
 
 
 r\ 
 
 1) 
 
 I 
 
 .iii^l 192» 
 
 ^7 
 
 /JiVt 
 
 ^* 
 
 OCT 8 1934 y^y^^hJui P 
 
 ilAY 04)934 
 
 L — J 
 
 1 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 
 
 0044261144 
 
END OF 
 TITLE