Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1886-05-15

| MENTs MADE ON BOTH sIDES-THE oU EsrIoN
| THOROUGHLY CANvAsSED-THE COST OF
| LIVING IN THIS CITY-wAGEs PAID IN orHEE
CITIES AND TO OTHER ARTISANS IN THIS
CITY.
| The first case occurring in this city, in which
differences between employers and employees
have been submitted to arbitration is that
| growing out OF the recent demand made by Co
| lumbia Typographical Union, No. 1OI, upon
the newspaper publishers of this city, for an in
crease of the price of composition from 40 to 5t
| cents per thousand ems, or an increase of TWEEN
| ty-fve per cent. Hon. Horatio King Commits
| sfoner COlman, of the Agricultural department.
| and Commissioner Oberly, of the civil service
| board, were chosen as arbitrators, these gentle
men having all had practical experience as
printers or publishers. The hearing of the case
| began before them in the library of the Agricu
! tural bureau Thursday morning, and was con
cluded yesterday. The printers union was
| represented by Messrs. Julian l.. Wright and
| Lac. R0dier. The associated publishers were
\ represented by MeSsrs. L. w. Fox. of the Re
| publican: Stilson Hufchins of the Post: Haliet
! hiibourn, of the Critic, and Crosby =. Noyes
and Frank b. Noyes, of THE STAR. The arbi
traitors occupied chairs at one side OF a long
table. Mr.. King, president of the board, having
| Commissioner Oberly, who acted as secretary
| at has LETT and Commissioner Colman AZ his
rlght. Inc representatives of the publishers and
| Oh the printers were provided with convenient
seats at the tables There was quite q formldabI
array OF documents spread out on both tables.
| The order OF procedure fixed by the board OF
| arbltrators gave the opening of the case to the
print ers, who had the affirmative.
STATING THE CASE.
When the hearing began Thursday morning
| Mr.. Rodier read a statement presenting a his
| tory of the case from the standpoint of the
/ typographical union, from the time when in
| June, 1877. the Union agreed to IL reduction OF
/ the scale from 90 to 50 cents per one thousand
| ems. August II, 1850, the Union suspended
4 o i'm N
| order TO permit men To work for 40 cents. That
| suspension was revoked by the recent resoiu-
| ton of the Union as lar as its operations eX-
| tended to the newspaper offices and the scale
| declared in force. This restoration the en-
| ployers resisted. In order that the publishers
! affected by the restoration might derive Il ben
| ellt therefrom 1T was coupled with reduction
OF hours OF labor OF one hour each day.
| Mr.. Fox followed with oral statement on
behalf OF the publishers. In 1880, he said,
| there was n reduction of the price OF compost
| trade being in our favor. Now demand was
| m,.de for an advance of % per cent without
To the publishers as an ultinHstum ii 1t were not
granted there would be a strike. The publish
eI5 proposed arhitration The printers com
! could get unanimous consent of the Union to
| rescind their former resolution they would
| agree to arbitrate. that if the publishers would
| pay this 90 cents for the two weeks pending ar
! bltration they could get this unanimous con-
sent OF the Union. The publishers submitted
! To this extraordinary demand, acting, as they
/ believed, in the public interest. There WAS, he
contended, no reason for this demand. The
! rates paid here already equalIed or exceeded
| Those paid III neighboring cities. The printers
are already paid more for day work than in the
| clty OF baltimore Ii the proposed demand
/ were granted prices here would be 20 per cent
/ higher than In Baltimore for night work, and
| 40 per cent higher for day work.
Nj. Wright objected TO the statement that
| the employers proposed arbitration. The
/ record, he claimed, showed that the PROPOSE
ton resulting ia the arbitration came from the
4 ~ m ff&.ln at hn t'ntn
Mr.. Fox asked Mr.. Wright if it were not true
| that the publishers had proposed arbitration;
and il MIR. Wright had not hesitated, and only
| yielded when admonished of the unpleasant
/ position the printers would put themselves in
| before the country by refusing.
MI. w right admitted that, but said the arbi-
traiion proposed 10y Mr.. Fox proposed 10 cover
0tner matters than those now submitted to ar
bltratiOu.
Mr.. Wright followed with "a statement OF
| facts" on the printers side. He set forth that
columbia Typographical Union had never dur
Ing the nineteen years OF its eAsteuce sought to
advance the price of composition. The reduc-
ton OF one hour in time each day was ne
Claimed, an advantage To the publisher. While
the per diem wages OF mechanics had advanced
since 1850 the price of composition had not.
Rents Tor small houses were higher than in
1850: fuel was higher; medical attendance
equally as costly; and custOm-maGe clothing
aud suoes more expensive. Publishers were
/ charging as high or higher advertising rates
than when the price OF composition was sixty
cents. More was expected OF the wage-WOrkers
/ i'll Washington, Mr.. Wright said, than else
/ Wnere Tor here In this beautiful city thew
| should not mar the beauty of the city by living
| IN squalor As compared with 1880 there had
been general appreciation OF real estate. The
| suspension Oh the scale OF fifty cents had con-
| tinued in operation while the price Of food had
advanced from ten to fifty per cent.
| THE PUBLISHERS SIDE.
| Mr.. Frank Il. Noyes, on behalf of the publish
ers, read a statement of facts" on that side of
the case first calling attention to the arbitrary
/ and unjust manner in which the existing diff
| leIences between the publishers and Columbia
Typographical Union, 1O1, were broug mt about
| by the Union, in violation of the law OF the
/ International Union, which directed subordi-
nate lodges not to order strike until .'every
effort had been made to settle the difficulty by
arbitration" and in violation OF an agreeme MT
| with tue publisher OF the Post not TO attempt
! 10 raise the schedule of prices. The publishers
being required TO pay the advance pending
! arbitration were obliged to pay heavily for the
| privilege OF arbitration instead OF having the
opportunity rendered to them by the Union as
! required by the rules of the National
| Union as a Justification for the proposed
advance; ut must be assumed how
ever. the statement proceeded that those
who are dissatisfied with the rate of wages ex
isJing at the time increase is demanded
must ask for an advance Tor at least one OF the
| following reasons LIST. That the cost of living
Is greater than when the eXistiig rate was fixet:
I'd. That they are unable to earn much as
the average OF those engaged in the same Occrl-
patton in other parts of the couptry; or Sd
That they are not as well paid for their labor as
others engaged in corresponding pursuits and
| occupying substantially the same position in
lite Ill their own locality" The statement then
! proceeded 20 give facts to- show, as IL was
/ claimed, that not one OF these three proposi-
! lions could be established.
| THE COST OF LIVING.
| "In relation TO the first point" the statement
said, "a careful and exhaustive inquiry shows
that on the whole the cost of living in Wash
| ington is not as great now as it was in 1880.
when the rates which II is now proposed to dis
| furb were fixed. Patent wheaton flour,
which then cost 50 per barrel, can
| now be bought here at 81 10 $50
| FImily flour, then So; now $3.50 to Sc. Cut
| sugar. then II cents per pound, now Slo: gran
/ uiated, linen IL CENTS per pound as against :
| now; brown, 10 cents then. against q cents
/ now. Then lard In cans cost IL cents per
| pound and in tubs 10, whereas now the former
can he bought for 10 cents and the latter for s.
Butter Is 30 per cent cheaper now than IL was
/ III 1880. Hams then cost IA cents per pound.
! now the price is l2l2. Fresh beef pork veal
| mutton, lamb, fowls and fish are nearly the
| same now AS then One or two items are per
/ haps "a little higher at present than at that
time. but there has been u substantial reduc-
ton In the price OF fresh meats, AS q whole and
| the same Is true of vegetables, which are
/ cheaper and better now than formerly In the
matter of fuel there has not been much change
Coal used tor heating is lower while there has
used mostly in ranges, etc; but in the ;ggre.
! gate the advantage is slightly with the con-
l sumner at the present time. In wood there has
| been no substantial change. Reauy-made
| clothing is certified by extensive and reputable
dealers in the city to De 20 per cent cheaper
LOCO feet then was 81; now it is 81 so. Iiu-
minating oils are L. to ] 5 per cent lower now
than then. In boots and shoes there has been
| no material change IN price; but the quality of