Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1888-03-01

Dor. / nave nothing to say concern
ing tie matter of q strike on
the road In question, for I
do not know the particulars, but If it is
true that the men are making an effort
to do away with the European custom of
grading the men up and down, regardless
OF merss, then they are right in making
a fight for equality. My opinion OF a
mar who takes the place OF. another who
10 struggling for his rights, is that he de-
man who loves justice. II is true that
members of the Brotherhood have in re
peated: instances taken the places
OF knights of Labor. It is
true that away back In the
early days Of the COS the Brother
hood men did the same thing with their
machinists and blacksmiths, at the COM
mand of their chief. 1t is true that
Brotherhood men stabbed Knights of
Labor in the back on the Southwest sys-
tenn, not only by taking their places, but
by urging them to strike, with a proffer
of assistance ii they would do SO. 1t is
true that the Brotherhood did take
the places of tho Reading men In the
strike on that road. The merits of the
various cases herein mentioned
have nothing to do with the
principle of honor which is involved In all
of them. Itis the, eternal shame of the
Brotherhood men that they stopped to
such acts OF and treachery.
The man WHO takes the place of another
man when that other is engaged in u
struggle with a corporation, is q scab,
whether he be a member of the Knights
ofLabor, or whether he be a member of
the brotherhood of Engineers. When
Charles Wilson ordered the Brotherhood
men to a the places of the men of the
Machinists' n Blacksmiths' union,
in 1S72-33, he did an unmanly,
cowRrdly thing. When P. Nj. Arthur
allowed the members of the Brotherhood,
over which he exercises such discipline,
to tamper with the rights of the striking
employees of the Missouri Pacific and
Wabash system, two years ago, he, too,
violated that principle of honor which
should restrain a man when about to do
wrong. 1t mattered not that the strikes
In question were not ordered by the chief
officers of the Knights OF Labor. II the
men who were interested felt that they
We're right, and took up the fight as en-
pioyes, regardless of what organiza-
tion they belonged to, and on
their own responsibility, they had
the right to do 80, and under the laws of
the land the members of the Brotherhood
were not obliged to make cravens of
themselves, as many Of them did, both
on the Southwestern system and in The
Reading strike. The taking of the mems
places was mean and ~dastardly. II those
actions were taken with the sanction Of
the chief of the Brotherhood, he too is
mean and dastard1y, but two wrongs
never make q right, and what liz mean
and dastardly in the members of the
Brotherhood Of Engineers cannot become
grand and noble in a member of the.
orderof the knights of Labor. No Knight
Of Labor should belittle his manhood by
STOPPING to such dirty work. If it is the
habit of Brotherhood men to do such
work as taking strikers places, then in
Heavens name let them have q monop-
oily Of it. Knights of Labor, IL you take
my advice, yon will stand back and al
low this struggle to so on. Let the
brotherhood demonstrate its power, and
stand alone without any ~t'entangling al
lance with those Of other trades. Let the
past be forgotten In this strike. No
matter how bitter you may feel to-
wards these men, remember thsss have not
stepped out OF the rur OF se-ff'--ness yet, and
it is better to teach theTa what manhood
means by keeping kends OF the o.. b. e.
@. strike. The saa sssacle presented by
men of labor who :. long to different or
g%anizations, rushing at each others'
Threats whenever a strike takes place.
must be q gratifying thing for the en-
ployefs of labor to look at. 1t must
indeed give satisfaction to the corpora
tions to knew neither knights of Labor
or Brotherhood men dare in the future ask