The workingman's advocate. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1864-1877, 1874-06-27

HEADQUARTERS CIeAH MAKEKs' ISr. UNION or n. A.
CLEVELAND, May Is, 1874.
Gentlemen Of the Ecec,tice Bodrd
l herewith transmit to you an appeal OF
Philadelphia Union No. 3 against decision
rendered BY me in the case Of Dayton No %
VS. Philadelphia No. 3. and also submit to
you all the correspondence relative thereto,
and Of which the folio wing is synopsis
Bye reference to Dayton communication
Of Dec |, 1873 marked No. H. you will find
that the men Eckert aud Althouse were cir
culAred by them as applicants for m ber-
ship, hailing from Philadelphia. Charges
were preferred against them BY that union,
and in the language of the letter conveying
the nature Of the charges copy of which is
enclosed they were, Ten dollars each that
is, IS each for reinstation, and five dollars
in another union" Union IS appealed against
the imposition Of the latter fines, and desired
to know if Union No 3 had a right to fine
men S. each for making application for mem
bership in their union. | Immediately wrote
to No. 3 for the particulars of the case, and
the reason why the s. in addition to the re-
instation fes, was imposed. BY reference to
their reply Of Dec. 3, 1873, you will find that
Mr. Althouse was fined S. for writing All
" insulting letter to their president, etc
then inquired why Mr.. Eckert was fined, or
if the insulting letter spoken Of was the
Joint production VI both men or Of Althouse
My, and added &" Ia your letter to No.
- You state that they were each fined s. for
applying for membership in another union.
Your union will pardon me, perhaps, when
state that | certainly could not see the justice
Of fining men for an offence Of such a nature
The desire to Join a union had heretofore
considered commendable, instead of being
PUNISHABLE etc. In the reply of No. 3,
dated Feb %, 1874. they state: g Union No.
3 has a law passed that all or every cigar
maker suspended by tins union leaving its
jurisdiction without a travelling card, and
making application for membership In another
union, is fined live dollars and they add
that the reason they made such law was on
account Of a great many cIgarmakers coming
there with cards, which, presume, had for
merly worked in Philadelphia.
then rendered the following decision in
the case Of Mr.. Eckert:
CLEVELAND, March 9, 1874
Thomas EJerhdrdt. Esq, Cor. See o. M. u.
No g:
Dear Sir You state that you have law
IN your union that all or every cigar maker
leaving your jurisdiction without travelling
fhsar
union is fined five dollars in addition to his
arrears and re-instation fee, and you claim
that you have a right to make such Law as
it does not conflict with the International
Constitution, &c. ! desire to state that
consider any law which fines a cigar maker
for making application for membership IN
another union, not only unconstltutlon-
al but wrong in principle, and against the
right of every man when he endeavors to
connect himself with n local union. Mr..
Eckert left YOUR jurisdiction without a travel
ing card. and some time after applied Tor adj
mission to Dayton UEion. Being circulared
as hailing from Philadelphia, you preferred
" charges" claiming s. re-instatlon tee, and
6ne Of s. for dPPtyng for membership IN
another union, which you desire Dayton
Union to collect and remit Dayton Union
appeals against that fine, claiming 1t In unjust
to line man for making application to JON
another union.
The appeal is sustained, and all you can
compel Union IS to collect is the arrears and
re-instation fee, which they are hereby order
ed to forward Immediately.
From that decision Union No. now ap-
appeals, and have only to add, that while
it would be desirable to have all cigar makers
tak- travelling cards befeze leaving the jurlss
diction Of . union, yet | cannot adrnit the
night Of any union TO make laws, imposing
fines, which from their nature must be en-