BANCROFTLIBRARY

<

THE LIBRARYOF

THE UNIVERSITYOF CALIFORNIA

TRADE UNIONEPIGRAMS

BY

WALTER MACARTHUR

SOME REASONS FOR THE FAITH THAT

Is WITHIN Us

ISSUED BY

THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABORWASHINGTON, D. C.

1904

H D 6 5"/ /

TRADE UNION EPIGRAMS,By WALTER MACARTHUR.

Man's first duty is to organize.

Labor will never realize its rights until

it recognizes its wrongs.

The labor movement is a thing not of

idealism but of instinct.

The "spirit of organization" and the"spirit of progress

" are interchangeableterms.

The record of trade unionism showsthat, after all, man was not made to

mourn.

The necessity of industrial organizationknows no law except that of humanprogress.

Next to the family, the trade union is

the highest exemplincatipn of the grega-rious instinct.

Trade unionism that is not purely prac-tical and simply sensible is not trade

unionism at all.

The extent of trade unionism is thebest possible measure of a people's capac-ity for self-government.

In trade unionism, as in other humanactivities, success oftenest attends thosewho know how to wait and work.

In the coming age of complete indus-trial organization international boundarylines will cease to be even imaginary.

Trade unionism, like Time, knowsneither beginning nor end. It is theGenesis and Revelations of the humansoul.

The need of the moment is not so muchfor the formation of new unions as for

new members in those unions alreadyformed.

As we see in the rainbow the harbingerof fine weather, so labor may see the

glories of its future through its tears.

Organized labor too often commits thecommon error of neglecting its friends in

order the more sedulously to cultivate its

enemies.

Labor is a necessity to human existence;

being such, it is obvious that under natu-ral conditions it should be a pleasure, nota penance.

The trade union is a standing challengeto that miserable old cynicism, "Everyman for himself, and the devil take thehindmost."

The trade union is the prime conserva-tor of individual liberty, as distinguishedfrom the political club, the conservator of

public liberty.

As we contemplate the progress of tradeunionism among the workers of the worldeven the millennium seems not impossi-ble of attainment.

When a man tires at the "slow prog-ress" of the labor movement a good recipeis to stand off a bit and survey the workactually accomplished.

After all, the "labor question" is butan arithmetical question. Unfortunately,however, we still lack agreement uponthe formula by which to solve it.

As a tree is strengthened by pruning,so the labor movement may be improvedby cutting out those elements that prop-erly belong in some other movement.

The most powerful labor organizationis that which in addition to the ability to

"put up a fight" has the brains to put upa good argument in justification or pre-vention of the last resort.

The tendency of trade unions, as ofother bodies of men, to act upon senti-ment rather than reason, would be moredangerous than it is, were it not for theintervention of that strongest of all forces,instinct.

Where the respective limits of anygiven trades are recognized there is noroom for dispute regarding the jurisdic-tion of each. Any dispute that does occurin such case may be safely referred to ex-traneous causes.

A certain philosopher has said that "in-stinct guided by reason is never wrong.

"

This observation explains much of thesuccess of trade unionism, which is

primarily an expression of the instinct of

self-preservation .

The history of the labor movement will

repeat its successes oftener and its failures

seldomer whenever the laborer learns to

accept experience as a gift from the pastinstead of insisting upon purchasing it

with his own good coin.

Those who regret the limitations of thetrade union movement may find some con-solation in the reflection that, after all,

the only movement that has not fallen

short of the highest hopes is that whichhas not yet been put to the test of practice.

The final limit of the power of tradeunionism is the limit of the capacity of

working men and women to perceive thattheir interests can be conserved only bythat form of organization in other words,the limit of the numbers organized.

The line of demarcation between tradeunions that properly embrace men of dif-

ferent callings and those that should con-tain only men of a particular craft lies

between those callings that are inter-

changeable, i. e., at which certain menwork by turns, and those to which menare exclusively confined. In the formercase the workers may, and in fact should,

organize together ;in the latter they

should organize separately.

The most valuable lessons that tradeunionism can learn are the lessons of

patience and mobility the lesson of howto wait for victory and the lesson of howto change a position in a fight.

The labor movement should te guardedagainst the growth that results in reple-tion. Strength and vitality depend uponpreserving a mean between the weaknessof small, and the lethargy of large, bodies.

The strength of organized labor lies inits weakness. That which it lacks in

power of compulsion it gains by appealto rational human ambition and intelli-

gent perception of right and wrong. Rightenjoined by force becomes wrong, andtherefore fails.

In a state of universal organizationamong the workers one meal would beworth all the money in the world. Inthat event the advantage would lie withthe stomach most inured to abstention.In other words, hunger would be the ally,not the enemy, of the workers.

A disposition on the part of a trade unionto talk with its employers is no sign of its

inability to adopt other means of securingjustice if need be. And, per contra, thetrade union that denies or ignores the wis-dom of conferring whenever possible gen-erally displays little stomach for sternermethods when forced to meet them.

To say that the creator is greater thanthe created is well enough as a general-ization, but we should be careful not touse that saying in justification of condi-tions the tendencies of which are in theirnature uncontrollable. For instance, weshould not say that the creator of a fire

in a powder magazine is greater than the

thing actually created, i. e., the explosionthat follows as a natural sequence. So, in

industrial affairs a body of free and intel-

ligent men mav easily enough create acondition of affairs that will inevitablyreduce them to a state of helplessness.

Morals of the Strike.

The manhood of the striker must take

precedence of the comfort of the public.

A strike always succeeds in proportionas it demonstrates the unprofitableness of

war.

It is only in the case of a strike that weappreciate the full depth of the employ-er's regard for the sanctity of contract.

Reformers generally would succeedbetter if they were to give less attention

to the effects of the strike and more to

the causes thereof.

A strike always succeeds in proportionas it arouses thought, particularly on the

part of those who are disposed to con-demn it thoughtlessly.

You can not reform the physical con-ditions of being by means solely intellec-

tual any more than you can appeasehunger by reading a menu.

Those who describe the strike as a

measure of " brute force " should remem-ber that, after all, nothing is accom-

plished by thought or talk alone.

The statistics of the losses due to strikes

would be less formidable and more in-

structive if they could be set off by thevalue of manhood saved in the issue.

No man can ever gain an understand-

ing of the labor movement as long as heharbors the fallacy that the strike or boy-cott is a creation of the ' ' labor leader. ' '

Ultimate success in a labor struggledoes not always depend upon the abilityto continue fighting. Not infrequently it

is the ability to quit that decides theissue.

If Abraham Lincoln were alive to-dayhe would probably say : "Thank God,we have a labor movement that can sus-

tain a strike until it accomplishes some-

thing."

Generally speaking,"respect for the

rights of the third party," as that phraseis used in connection with strikes, im-

plies disrespect for the rights of the othertwo parties.

That species of public sympathy withthe demands of strikers which flies to theother side at the first sign of a break in

the peace is in effect a particularly perni-cious form of hostility.

The man who knows least about thestrike talks loudest about its evils. Theman who knows most about the strike

most clearly perceives the ' ' soul of goodin things miscalled evil."

The best regulated labor organizationis that which most clearly distinguishesbetween the time for talk and the timefor fight which fights with all its powerand when it quits, stays quit.

The "innocent third party" has its

rights in the case of a strike, of course.But it has no right to compel the resump-tion of work by the strikers in order sim-

ply that it may be spared inconvenience.

If one body of men have a right to quitwork to compel a necessary improvementin the conditions of their lives, no other

body of men can have a right to taketheir places. The court of morals takes nocognizance of the right to scab.

A strike is a method, and frequently the

only effectual one, of protesting againstinjnstice. If the public could be got to

take action upon a mere statement of thefacts they would have less occasion to

complain of the hardship inflicted bystrikes upon

" the innocent third party."The strike, so far from proving a back-

ward state of civilization,is indeed the final

test of a people's progress toward true lib-

erty. The extent of a nation's advancementmay be judged exactly by the extent to

which its people are guaranteed the rightto strike and to which that right is exer-

cised.

Whether the immediate obj ect be gainedor not, a justifiable strike always suc-

ceeds in proportion as .it attracts publicattention. In this view it sometimes hap-pens that the very failure of the imme-diate object is an element of success, since

thereby the evils complained of are themore clearly demonstrated.

Kven those persons who oppose thestrike on general principles show a dis-

position to modify their views whenever

they realize that a given strike has suc-

ceeded, if only in part. If these personscould be brought to realize that almost all

strikes succeed in part they would also

realize that the general principle uponwhich their opposition to the strike is

based is merely a lack of discernment of

the strike's real significance.

CompitIsory Arbitration .

Compulsory arbitration is compulsoryservitude.

Compulsory arbitration: The strangest

god in the empyrean of the longed-for.

The compulsory arbitrationist -wouldcure the disease by killing the patient.

No government can be free which as-

sumes to dictate the disposition of man'slabor.

There may be much to arbitrate, butthere never will be anything arbitrated

between the strong and the weak.

The compulsory arbitrationist shouldremember that the government, like fire,

is a good servant but a bad master.

It is quite in keeping with the fitness of

things that compulsory arbitration shouldfind its highest acceptation in the land of

the boomerang.

Arbitration is the alternative of war. It

will never be more than an unattainable

ideal to those who are unwilling or unableto put up a fight.

The man who cites compulsory arbitra-

tion as a remedy for strikes might with

equal propriety cite the balloon as a con-

tradiction of the laws of gravity.

It is hardly necessary to say that abol-

ishing an evil and suppressing the com-

plaint about it are entirely different, and,in fact, antithetical, propositions.

To understand clearly the significanceof compulsory arbitration in the interest

of the public we have but to recall

^Esop's fable of the monkey, the cat, andthe cheese.

The principle of compulsory arbitra-

tion, i. e., enforced labor, rhay with

equal propriety be extended to enforce

idleness, to enforce starvation in other

words, to inflict death.

Arbitration is a business, not a moral,

proposition. It will grow in favor withthe employer in proportion as the em-

ploye demonstrates his ability to makethe other method the more costly.

The compulsory arbitrationist whowould have wages fixed by law probablyflatters himself that he is ahead of his

generation. In reality he is merely there-embodied spirit of an age long past.

Take from man the right to quit workat his own pleasure, and you take fromhim that attribute which, next to the

right to light itself, marks the difference

between the human and the loweranimal.

Almost anybody can see a difference

between arbitration compelled by active

public opinion and arbitration compelledby the employer and administered by the

employer's court.

Honorable terms is the predicate of

arbitration, consequently there can beno need of physical compulsion in the

acceptance of that resort. "Compulsoryarbitration "

is compulsion, as opposed to

arbitration.

A trade union without the right and

power to strike is an anomaly. A trade

union, the chief use of which is to make a

strike impossible, as under the compul-sory arbitration system, is a crime againstcommon sense.

Skim it, strain it, and apply the micro-

scope, and you will find that the real sen-

timent of the compulsory arbitrationist is

pure selfishness the selfishness that

takes its own belly as the criterion of

good or evil in all things.

The idea that compulsory arbitration

laws encourage the organization of the

workers amounts in fact to the paradoxof organizing the workers for the primaryobject of destroying the very power that

makes organization itself worth while.

In the logical view, the trade union is

organized for peace, with the strike as an

ever-present means of securing it uponhonorable terms. In the compulsory arbi-

trationist's view the trade union is organ-ized for peace, with the dictum and

authority of a court to maintain it uponany terms. The only purpose actuallyserved by such an organization is to in-

sure at least the appearance of commonconsent to a judicial despotism that

otherwise would be intolerable.

The objection to compulsory arbitration

lies not so much in the fear of injusticeas in the dislike of being forced to accepteven justice at the hands of the Govern-ment. We prefer the injustice of our ownmaking to the justice of an assumedmaster.

We have a great deal of sympathy but

very little respect for the order of intel-

lect that can see no difference betweenthe compulsion of a court and the com-

pulsion of a trade union in the regulationof the employe's relations with the em-

ployer.

Conciliation and arbitration are, of

course, well worth seeking. In the presentimperfect state of industrial morals, how-ever, it is apparent that the hope of

attaining these ends lies chiefly in the

power of either or both parties to fall

back upon the sterner alternative.

When we reflect that one of the chief

purposes of the trade union is to restrainthe aggressiveness of the Government,the idea of the compulsory arbitrationistthat the Government should be vestedwith authority to supersede the otherchief purposes of trade unionism is a

striking instance of inconsistency.

It is a grievous error to say, as do thefriends of compulsory arbitration, thatbecause that system is applied only to

organized workers, it is an adjunct andsupport of trade unionism. As well mightit be said that because the law hangs onlythe murderer, it is an adjunct and sup-port of murder! The fact is that com-pulsory arbitration is applied only totrade unions because only they can makea strike successful as a means of suspend-ing industry. The individual employer is

his own " arbitrator " in the case of the

unorganized workers.

The Shorter Workday.

A store closed early is a store run easily.

An hour off the day's labor is an houradded to the day's life.

It is inevitable that the man who worksat night should think only in the dark.

The reduction of the hours of labor in-

creases production by virtue of the lawthat demand increases supply.

The early closing of stores makes for

the earlier opening of the rational era in

the lives of the store workers.

The movement to reduce the hours oflabor will continue as long as labor itself

continues to be merely physical exertionfor the maintenance of animal existence.

The shorter workday is the most im-

portant question before the labor move-ment, and will continue to be such, be-cause it is the simplest and most direct,

way of adjusting the problem of distribu-

tion.

The basis of the shorter workday move-ment is recognition of the truth that mandoes not live to work, but works to live.

A working day that leaves no intervalbetween work and sleep would reduce manto the state of the animal that is, the

draught animal.

The shorter workday movement willcontinue to ' ' move ' ' as long as humannature retains its essential characteristic,i. e.,

" the desire for more." And it willcontinue to succeed as long as humannature itself succeeds.

The lessening of the daily hours oflabor increases the total of products byincreasing the opportunity and disposi-tion for consuming them. The sum of thedifference between a savage and a civ-

ilized state is merely the difference be-tween men who have time and inclinationto gratify their physical needs only, andmen who have time, inclination, and de-termination to indulge and cultivate theintellectual side of their nature.

Child Labor.

The employer of child labor is a homi-cide on the wholesale.

Speaking literally as well as figur-

atively, child labor is child murder.

The difference between child labor andconvict labor is mainly a matter of age.

If there were fewer slaving childrenthere would also be fewer idling parents.

Every child sacrificed to the factory

system is a potential rebel against all

forms of industry.

We should not be surprised if the child

who is tied to a machine develops a case

of" wheels "in after life.

The agitation against child labor is

simply a movement to re-establish thenatural order in family affairs.

It is rather unfortunate that the laws

against infanticide were established before

the crime of child labor had become anissue.

If Tom Hood had lived in the SouthernStates he would probably have chosenthe child worker as the theme of his

"Song."

Those parents who are forced to dependfor support upon their children do not

necessarily love them the more on that

account.

Not "What has posterity done for us?"but "What will posterity do to us?" is

the question that statesmanship may well

consider in its treatment of the child

labor evil.

The attempt to jusify child labor bypleading the " laziness of the parents

"is

insult added to subterfuge.

If we are to believe that one's ideals are

the reflex of early training, it is to be

hoped that those of the factory child will

never be realized.

The factory child, denied the right tolearn to play, is the progenitor of the manwho can do no more than toy with themost serious affairs.

It is not to be expected that a child

brought up under the restraints of factorylabor will develop a very high regard for

liberty of any kind.

It must not be assumed that the childwho receives its only education while

tending a machine will necessarily de-

velop a machine-like obedience to drivingpower.

Gradgrind himself shines as a senti-

mentalist in comparison with the South-erner who insists that the children shouldbe put in the factory instead of in theschool.

The penchant for child labor displayedby employers in the South seems to in-

dicate the need of a new definition of

chivalry, as applied to employers of thatsection.

The employer of child labor who readshis Bible probably regards with regret theassurance of the Savior that the Kingdomof Heaven is composed mainly of chil-

dren, since he can not hope to start a

factory or in any other way "invest capi-tal" there.

The Piece-Work System.

In practice,' '

piece-work' ' and ' '

part

payment' ' are synonymous terms.

The larger the wage by the "piece,"

the smaller the wage by the " whole."

Overtime and piece-work are the twindevices by which individual greed is usedto degrade the mass.

The piece-work system is easily under-stood. The worker who is paid by the

piece receives only a piece of the sumactually earned.

It is paradoxical but true that were it

not for the establishment of the minimumwage all wages would be down to thelowest possible point.

In discussing wages, cheapness shouldnot be confounded with economy. Theseterms are incompatible and inconsistent.

By establishing a minimum wage thetrade union lays a foundation from whichall wages rise. Without that bedrock all

wages must inevitably sink.

living results inevitably in lowwages. It is customary with the thought-less to hold up the man who saves out ofa small wage by denying himself thenecessaries and decencies of life. Such aman is not a model, but a warning to his

fellows, since his example, if generallyfollowed, would reduce all to the lowest

possible standard of living.

The Union Label.

The union label: The insignia of indus-trial decency.

The trade-mark stands for the trader;the union label for the tradesman.

You can always tell a union man by thecoat that he wears if it bears the unionlabel.

To know a product made under fair

conditions, if you see the union label onit, it's so.

The simple announcement that anarticle bears the union label is all the ad-vertisement needed by the consumer whocares for principle as well as for price.

Give an article a union label and youmay be sure it is "just as advertised."

As a preventative of strikes nothinghas yet been discovered which exceedsin potency the union label.

The thrifty housewife should be careful

that in buying at a bargain she isn't sell-

ing somebody's job at a sacrifice.

As a preventative of strikes and boy-cotts the union label is simplicity itself.

A child can operate it that is, ask for it.

The union label on any product is a

guarantee that the money paid for it will

return to the consumer, with interest, in

the form of improved social surroundings.

Government by Injunction.

In the case of the injunction in labor

disputes, contempt of court is respect for

law.

The "injunction judge

" who would be

respected should take care that he re-

spects the law in his own practice.

The injunction against the boycott is a

negation of the first principles of free gov-ernment, i. e., the right of petition.

The man who is enjoined from doing a

thing that is lawful may be dependedupon to do that thing, if only as a meansof vindicating the law.

Some day our injunction judges will

wake up* and find the whole world in re-

volt against their assumption of superior-

ity to all law, natural as well as statutory.

Injunctions against the boycott, beingpowerless to compel patronage of unfair

concerns, will always be futile as long as

the spirit of fair play exists among menand women.

The injunction judge who cares to

know how he stands in public estimationcan get a fairly reliable line on the pointby reading the jokes about him nowgoing the rounds of the funny papers.

The Labor Press.

The labor press is labor's only reliable

preceptor.

The power of the labor press inheres in

the fact that it is not only with the work-ers but of them.

Comparatively speaking, the labor edi-

tor is the most potent figure in all the

range of journalism. With care, his powerfor good is great; with carelessness, his

power for harm is still greater.

The labor press will not begin to be the

power it should be until the people in

whose interests it is published begin to

show it a little of the deference andrespect that they now bestow upon the

press of their opponents.

The labor press is the only remainingfree press.

Every new labor paper established is anew outpost of the workers' army, a

guidon planted nearer the goal.

If the intellect were as highly developedas is the instinct we would seldomer wit-ness the absurdity of the working class

seeking its pabulum in the columns of the

daily press.

The merit of a labor paper is provedmore by the amount of matter stolen fromits columns than by the amount that is

reprinted with credit. As imitation is

the siucerest form of flattery, so literal

appropriation is the strongest admissionof worth.

Union Industry.

"Union Industry" stands always for

happier homes ;"Home Industry

" stands

too frequently for dirtier sweatshops.

The term "Home Industry" is com-mon property, but only a fair employercan use the term "Union Industry" as

an advertisement in his business. For that

reason the latter is the only term that thetrade unionist can use with safety to theinterests of the union.

"Patronize Home Industry" is pri-

marily an appeal in the interest of the

employer." Patronize Union Industry"

appeals always in the name of the em-ploye.

The Labor Leader.

Too many trade unionists would havethe old maxim read : "An injury to meis the concern of all."

Consistency is a jewel which the trade

unionist may, and indeed should, displayas conspicuously as possible.

We can not lay too much stress uponthe difference between the union manand the member of a union.

Regular attendance at the meetings of

the union is as good a criterion as anyof the spirit that really dominates the

members.

Even philosophy, which conquerseverything but toothache, is put to hardstraits at times in the life of the "laborleader."

Fortunately for his efficiency, the"labor leader" is under no obligationto take to heart the slurs of his enemiesinside and outside the ranks of labor.

The member who assumes what he is

pleased to call the middle ground in debate too frequently does so in order tohide his ignorance of either of the other

grounds.

The " labor leader " who wobbles underabuse and misconstruction from friend or

foe can generally find the cause of his in-

stability in the fact that his boots are too

big for him.

Nature provides a compensation for

every misfortune. The internecine

troubles of the labor movement keep us

from worrying about our troubles withthe natural enemy.

The labor movement does not lack for

men who can point out the promise of the

future. What it too frequently does lack

is the man who remembers and respectsthe lessons of the past.

Strict attention to one's own business is

commendable; but the trade unionist

should beware of carrying the rule so far

as to refuse the attention he owes to the

business of his fellow-workers.

The man who talks about the ' ' sacri-

fices" he has made for the labor move-

ment usually spends most of his energiesin the effort to

"get back his own " and

as much more as possible.

In taking advantage of the ' '

spirit of

organization," organizers should be

guarded against creating elements that

tend toward the segregation rather thanthe cohesiveness of the labor movement.

If men would adhere strictly to thesound rules of practice in trade unionism,as they do to the rules of arithmetic, ,ve

should witness fewer instances of division

and subtraction under the guise of addi-

tion.

It is gratifying to reflect that much of

the so-called dissension in the ranks of

organized labor .is but the inevitable

accompaniment and evidence of the vital

force within the movement. The deadalone present a perfectly peaceful ex-

terior.

Possibly the tenement-house cigarmanufacturer advertises his weeds by thename of ' ' Robert Burns,

" " Tom Moore,' '

"Henry George," or other friend of hu-

manity, as a salve to the conscience of

those members of organized labor whosmoke them.

The view of the majority is always right,since it alone can be put into practice.The view of the minority can never bemore than a theory incapable of demon-stration.

However regrettable the internecine

troubles of the trade unions, there re-

mains the consolation that at the crucial

moment the opposition of the commonenemy will force them to make commoncause.

The "labor leader" who fully appre-ciates the responsibility of his office is to

be commended;but the "labor leader"

who falls into the error of regarding him-self as indispensable is in need of a severe

corrective.

When we are inclined to be impatientof the small mindedness that sometimes

crops up in the labor movement we shouldreflect that, after all, the fact is a compli-ment to the intensely human character of

the institution.

As a man may be loved for the enemieshe has made, so the " labor leader " whois not the subject of denunciation, libel,

and misconstruction from certain sources

is justly open to suspicion regarding his

disinterestedness.

The man who is inclined at times to

regard himself as the ' ' whole cheese ' ' in

the labor movement may find somethingworth while in the reflection that after all

he is merely a mite a creature born of

the movement's age and strength.

There isn't much to choose betweenthe union man who regards the paymentof dues as his sole obligation to organizedlabor and the non-union man who as-

sumes no obligation at all and whatchoice there is favors the latter, rather.

The disposition to indulge in personali-ties in the treatment of trade unionaffairs is a proof of that egotism that putsthe individual above the mass. The ego-tist should remember that even if all the

charges against the other fellow were

true, it would make no difference in the

end. The trade union, being groundedupon the necessities of the workers' ex-

istence, will pursue its way serene, indif-

ferent, oblivious to individual perfectionor frailty.

10

It is well that we should draw a clear

distinction between the member who dis-

plays a great deal of enthusiasm in debateand the member who merely evinces abad temper.

It has been well said that indifferenceis incompatible with love. The same mayas truthfully be said with reference to all

other phases of mental absorption. Forinstance, the so-called calmness of thedebater on any subject of importanceusually proves nothing more than lack of

interest in the result.

The criticism of the " labor leader " onthe ground of his failure to lead his

union into politics is rather a complimentto his attentiveness to his own business.

The man who boasts of being the"father of the union " should be guardedagainst allowing his parental solicitude to

become like that of the mother who re-

mains always afraid lest her boy will gotoo near the water. Unions, like children,

grow to years of discretion, when theymust for their own good be allowed to

exercise it.

Labor and Politics.

It is the worker, not the voter, whogoverns the conditions of labor.

It is the universal experience that theunion that goes into politics goes into

trouble.

By their votes men may declare for a

good government, but it is only by their

labor that they can realize that object.

Take care of the economic interests,and the moral, social, and political in-

terests will take care of themselves.

Much r

of the asseveration that theunions should go into politics meansmerely that the members thereof, or

certain of these, should go into office.

In point of practicability the advice to

"strike at the ballot-box" amounts to

much the same thing as advice to the

man in a storm to seek shelter under the

plans of a house.

Nothing in the future is more nearlycertain than that those who can not gov-ern their own affairs as workers will neverbe able to govern the affairs of the countryas patriots.

The trade union that goes into politicsresembles an anchored balloon, control-

lable only in proportion as it is tied downby forces which offset the natural tend-

ency to fly away.

To us it seems rather remarkable thatthe man who believes most profoundly in

the potency of politics should be so in-

tensely incredulous, not to say cynical, onalmost every other subject.

The power of the workers is not in their

votes but in their productive capacity.And in the last resort that power can bedemonstrated only by ceasing to produce.Those who argue against the strike, perse, may find profit in this reflection.

The man who would have the tradeunions experiment with "political action"would experiment in his own person with

gravitation but for the risk to his bones.He forgets, or cares not, that the trade

union, too, has bones that may be broken.

Upon reflection it will be observed thatthe difference between the good and thebad politician is merely the difference be-

tween the politician on the platform andthe politician in office. In this, as in mostother matters, opportunity is the final

test.

In politics the minority of the voters,no matter how great their numbers, can

accomplish nothing. In trade unionismthe minority of the workers, though com-

paratively few in numbers, as it happens,have made their influence felt materially

upon every phase of labor's existence.

The idea that all economic questionsmay be solved by the ballot,

" whichregisters the freeman's will as lightningdoes the will of God," is one of the mostremarkable crotchets ofthe times. We cannot imagine such a state of beatitude, andwe would not hope for it if we could.There is this difference between the will

of the freeman and the will of God thereis bnt one God, while there aremany free-

men, each with a will of his own and a

strong disposition to do more than merelyregister it.

11

Labor and the Government.

If there were no servile men there wouldbe no despotic governments.

Every additional function vested in theGovernment is a step backward toward

despotism.

Society is always in greater danger fromits own weakness than from the Govern-ment's tyranny.

Labor does not ask the Government to

better its conditions, but simply to give it

a chance to do that for itself.

In proportion as the workers help them-selves by the power of trade unionismthere is the less need of help from the

law-making powers and the less disap-

pointment because of failure on the partof the latter.

If all lawbreakers were behind barsthere would be fewer administrators of

law and also less need for those.

A militia and a standing army may lookbrave enough and prove effective enoughin deterring or suppressing any offensive

movement among the people. But opposedto a people roused to the defense of theirliberties the entire institutions of militar-

ism would be as chaff in a gale.

We are apt to credit with too muchvirtue the maxim that "all govern-ment rests upon physical force." Noamount of force can for long maintain

government in opposition to the will of

the people; no force is required to main-tain government in accord with that will.

The "Friend of Labor."

The only entirely reliable "Friend of

Labor "is labor itself.

Organized labor has need to distinguishclearly between its friends and its merefavorites.

When labor is true to itself it will haveno further need to ask favors of its" friends." It will then command justiceof itself.

A man's friendship for organized labor

may be better judged by his dispositionto stay in the background at certain

times than by his willingness to come to

the front at others.

When the workers acquire the virtue of

self-dependence a great many" friends of

labor" will have to adopt some other

profession.

The organized workers will do well to

question the disinterestedness of thosefriends who appear only in times of pros-perity or excitement.

The real friend of labor shows his

friendliness by granting the claim of theworkers to know most about their ownaffairs. The professional in that line is

known by his assumed superiority of

judgment.

A Word With the Reformer.

Too many men would rather be recog-nized as " radical " than as right.

Too many persons set about reformingthe world before informing themselves.

The trouble with the man who can seeno hope ahead of him is simply that heis headed the wrong way.

Analyze almost any radical ' ' ism ' ' andyou will find that it is composed mainlyof solecism and cynicism.

It is the "dreamer" who keeps theworld from going to sleep altogether.

About the least effective way of advo-

cating any particular theory of reform is

to cast discredit upon other theories.

The force of a truth may be better evi-

denced by the opposition than by the ap-proval with which it is at first greeted.

It is easy enough to arouse enthusiasmwith a new idea, but not so easy to compelthought by the expression of an old truth.

12

The man in the dark follows the cry of' '

Progress' ' without really knowing

whether it comes from ahead or from be-hind.

You can't teach a "new" trade unionistold tricks. He insists upon learning inhis own way and at the cost of his ownbumps.

Novelty in reform ideas, as in every-thing else, will attract a crowd. But nov-

elty and soundness are entirely different

things.

The agitator can afford to soar as far as

Pegasus will carry him;but the leader

must stay within reasoning distance of hisfellows.

The reformer who advances beyondsight of his fellows frequently doubles onhis tracks and heads backward without

knowing it.

We admire the man who " dares to bein the right of two or three,

' '

providedhis daring is not inspired mainly by adesire for notoriety.

After all, it frequently happens thatwhat we call progress denotes nothingmore than that we have stopped short of

positive retrogression.

Much of that which passes as "progres-

sive " and "advanced" in the thought of

to-day is merely outgrown notion ex-

pressed in a strange vocabulary.

The dilettante reformer would admin-ister the truth to the "

upper classes " aswe administer medicine to a child witha good deal of sweetening. But the manof sense knows that a dose of facts, to beefficacious at all, must be taken in all its

unpalatableness.

The world's most useful citizens havebeen merely "dreamers," in the esteemof their fellows. The whole progress ofhumankind is but a realization of theirvisions.

The work of reform succeeds or fails in

proportion as it is shaped to conformwith conditions as they are or with con-ditions as they might be in proportionas it is practical or speculative.

Generally speaking, if the man whoconsiders himself "ahead of the times"would pause and look backward he wouldfind that he is merely proceeding in adirection opposite to that of the times.

The reformer who cites the past only to

contemn it resembles the navigator whoshould attempt to shape a course without

knowledge of the time at first meridian.Both are bound to be very much

' ' at sea ' '

in the end.

Local conditions are poor bases bywhich to judge principles. He who con-fines his observations on the subject of

gravitation to the operations of a kite ora balloon is likely to be seriously at fault

in his conclusions.

In reckoning upon the strength of his

following the expounder of "radical"reforms should be careful to distinguishbetween those who are convinced andthose who are merely amused. The mosteccentric attracts the most attention.

If men would take trouble to verifythose reports of current happenings whichthey use in substantiation of their viewsand in proof of the progress thereof a

good many theories of reform would be

deprived of their only appearance of

public acceptation. As it is, most of these

reports are unimportant because untrue.

Recognition oj the Union.

"Recognition of the union," after all,

implies merely a guarantee of good faith

on the part of the employer toward his

employes.

The importance of the demand for

"recognition of the union" may be

very well judged by the amount of oppo-sition it encounters from the employingclass.

About the only argument (?) left thenon-unionist is that of the fox who hadlost his brush, to-wit, that brushes are

altogether too common.

There can not be any question of the" sacredness of contract " with a tradeunion whose actual existence is assailed.

The contract itself is abrogated by theact of assault.

13

If consistency were a marketable com-

modity the average employer would prob-ably keep in stock an entirely different

brand of anti-union argument (?).

The man who insists upon ' '

runninghis own business " would be more consist-

ent and more successful if he would recog-nize the line between his business and thebusiness of the human race.

Labor can not make an improvement in

its own conditions without breaking the

friendship (?) of the employer who hasassumed the whole right to attend to that

sort of thing in his own good time.

The employer who is most strenuousin claiming the right to

' ' run his ownbusiness "

is frequently most insistent in

the claim that it is the duty of his em-

ployes to attend to the advertising endthereof.

The organized workers may agree to the

employer's proposal to deal with his em-

ployes "as individuals" as soon as the

employer agrees to abandon the trust, cor-

poration, company, and copartnershipand go back to the primitive relations of

master and man. And that will be plentysoon enough.

The interests of labor and capital are

one, declare some persons. But the veryfrequency and insistency with which thestatement is made would seem to argue adoubt as to its correctness.

The Daniel who should come to judg-ment on the contract between a tradeunion and a corporation would find that,

according to the latter's construction,there is more 'than a pound of flesh nomi-nated in the bond.

Business men would do well to remem-ber that the logical remedy for any dis-

advantage in competition suffered bythem through the employment of organ-ized labor is not less trade unionism in

their own business but more trade union-ism in the business of their competitors.

It is a mistake on the part of labor to

attempt the refutation of the "class"

theory by insistence upon the mutualityof the interests of labor and capital. Theseare merely elements of the same princi-ple the productive capacity. To speak,therefore, of the mutuality of interest

between labor and capital as of two prin-

ciples is of itself to recognize two classes,the laborer and the capitalist.

To Certain Critics.

Even the beasts of the field know thevalue of sticking together.

Consider the opponent of trade union-

ism, and you will find one who lacks sys-tem in most of his thoughts and actions.

The man who questions the continued

growth and success of the labor move-ment pays a very small compliment to the

potentialities of human nature.

It is quite natural, of course, but nonethe less significant, that most of the fault-

finding concerning trade unionism comesfrom those outside of that institution.

Some persons can't help opposingtrade unionism for much the same reasonthat some persons can't help jumpingfrom a great height. Lightheadednessdoes it.

Frequently the wisdom of any proposedstep may be judged as an inverse ratio tothe amount of condemnation it receives.In this as in all other matters we considerthe source.

When we are inclined to marvel at thedensenessof the person who questions thevalue of trade unionism, let us rememberthat the mole, too, probably cavils at thatother law of nature, the recurrence of dayand night.

The man who confines himself too

closely to the facts of the labor movementit as little qualified to judge the scope anddirection of that movement as is the manwho stands right up to the cornerstone to

judge the height and symmetry of acathedral. In both cases distance lends

proportion as well as enchantment to theview.

14

The labor movement, like every othermovement that moves, is subject to a gooddeal of uncomplimentary remark fromthose who stand still and sneer. Probablythe mule who looks over the fence andwobbles an ear at the lightning expresshas a rather small opinion of railroad

speed.

The man who in these days will seri-

ously debate the affirmative of the ques-tion, "Resolved, That trade unions are amenace to the prosperity of the coun-try," belongs to that order of personswho, when the case goes against them,find their only relief in cursing thecourt.

General Observations.

Even death itself may shortly have to

give way to the trust as the "greatleveler."

The man who opposes Chinese exclu-sion is interesting chiefly as the exceptionthat proves the rule.

The "international merger" businesswill not reach an ideal perfection until

the workers of the world go into it.

The success of any civilization is to bemeasured by the comfort of its workers,not by the affluence of its drones.

The non-unionists are the comets of thesocial system. You can never tell at whatmoment they may collide with each other.

After all, the only difference betw^mthe labor trust and the capitalist trust is

the difference between altruism and sel-

fishness.

The community which leases its law-breakers has no logical claim to respectfor its laws, and in fact receives very little

of that.

The unassimilativeness of the Chineseis generally cited as a point against the

race, whereas, logically regarded, it is a

point in its favor. We prefer to remainunassimilated.

The "crime of dying rich "is the crime

of living to accumulate riches. It can notbe atoned for by giving in alms to one,that which has been taken in greed fromanother.

Most of the arguments made in favor of

cheap labor would be absolutely invulner-able if applied to the cheap laborer.

Applied to the American laborer, theyare thin enough to blow peas through.

Labor Day affords the opportunity of

reviewing the facts ofthe labor movement,the facts not of to-day only but of all

time, marshaled in the order of their pro-portion and chronology.

The efficacy of the labor aphorism de-

pends not so much upon its literal truth-fulness as upon the fact that the unbe-liever must think to the extent of half acolumn or so in order to disprove it.

When reflecting upon the power of

money it should be remembered that after

all it can not be eaten. The producers of

food, clothing, and shelter constitute the

power that dominates in the last event.

The saying, "A dollar saved is a dollar

earned," like most generalizations, is

subject to modification. A dollar saved in

the purchase of a cheap-labor product is

a dollar lost to the cause of decent livingconditions.

In a state of machine production the"superior race " is that whose character

most closely resembles the characteristicsof machinery a large capacity for labor,little demand for rest, and no requirementfor recreation.

In the sentimental view Chinese exclu-sion is regarded as a denial of the Brother-hood of Man

; practically, however, it is

but an application of the principle of self-

preservation, which recognizes no ques-tion of lineage.

The use of language to disguise thoughthas never been more clearly exemplifiedthan in the term "

subsidy," meaning the

appropriation of public moneys to privatepurposes. The real idea involved couldbe more correctly expressed by a word of

less length and much wider currency.