Workmen's advocate. (New Haven, Conn.) 1883-1891, 1889-09-21
NEW YORK SPEAKS.
lCOntinNed from first paael.

ton had never heard the charges against
| the Executive. On the other hand, it
was claimed that all New York members
were. as matter of fact. we'll &C
/ quainted with the charges, most of
which were matters of record in the
! party papers, and even those of the
American Section, although they had
designedly refused to hear them when
the German Section attempted to bring
them to their notice.
On motion of Comrade Nogt, the fol
! lowing statement was adopted by 1853
against votes:
al The retired members of the Elk
ecutive have long ago proven themselves
! incapable of conducting the affairs of
the party 1t is owing to their manage
ment that the party has come to be
! looked upon by organized workmen as
| hostile to theiraims, and has lost ground
among the class where alone it can eX.
pect support and following, This Was
notorious for months, and those inca
pabIe officers ought to have been re-
called long ago,
-. As according to the constitution
! and to decision OF the Board of Super
vision the right of withdrawal was
vested in the New York members; it
was their duty to intercedc The mat
ter was taken up by the German Sec.
ton who, by a committee. investigated
the grievances against the officers.
''3. The vote on the report Of the
committee was almost unanimously in
favor of Withdrawal. 1t was then APP
parent and has become smore evident
with every successive vote taken that
an overwhelming ma orlty of the New
York members had come TO the concIu-
sion that it was their duty TO exercise
their right of withdrawal against Hintze,
Gerecke, Rosenberg and Sauter.
a. The endeavor of those officers to
maintain themselves in their offices
against the will of their constituents is
the key to the course since pursued 10y
them and their friends, the only object
of which course was to prevent by
tricks and technicalities, the New York
members as long as possible from the
exercise of their constitutional right Of
withdrawal"
''TO that purpose, the American Sec
ton. on an untenable technicaIity re-
fused to hear the report of the Com
respond to the call OF the German and
Jewish Sections mine tenths of the New
York members) for joint meeting.
ITO that purpose, the City Committee
had to refuse Illegally to place the mo-
ton of the German Section for with
drawal and new election of Executive
on the order of business, by which re-
fusal three representatives of the Ger
man Section who voted for it acted in
defiance Of their constituents.
"To that purpose, the City Committee
had to make the illegal attempt of fore
ing upon the joint meeting an arbitrary
method Of proceeding; /. e., the insttu-
ton of a new investigation.
$40 that purpose, the few friends Of
the four retired officers had to claim
over and over again that they were
not acquainted with the charges, al
though they had themselves frequently
heard them detailed and discussed.
IS. According to.the constitution. as
well as to the decision of the Board of
Supervision, the joint meeting had
power to withdraw members Of the Ex-
ecutive and fill the vacancies; for the
City Committee was bound to place
upon the order of business the motion
of the German Section, else that COM
lnittee would have arbitrary power Of
preventing any action of any joint
meeting unsatisfactory to it,
The City Committee having Illegally
named an arbitrary order OF business,
the joint meeting had the right to take
up for action the motion of tue German
Section.
1.-THE right of withdrawal is not based
upon charges or investigations, but on
the loss of confidence Of the constituents
in their officers.
at is a right that can be exercised at
any time when the constituents are
legally in session.
''6. In writing letter on Sept. Q, in
which they gave directions to officers
who might be, but had not yet been,
elected, the Board of Supervision went
clearly outside Of its jurisdiction. AS
the Board in that case acknowledged
that those new members would be
legally elected, it could not forbid them
the discharge of their duties.
81. The decision Of the Board of
Supervision Of Friday, Sept. 10, was
made without informing the New York
members that all appeal had been taken
from or protest made against the ac-
ton of the joint meeting, and without
giving the new officers or the New York
members an opportunity of defending
their action.
In deciding ON the statements of one
side only. the Board violated the most
elementary principles of justice, and
treated the New York members with a
disregard which was certainly so much
more unwarranted, as the New York
Section has for many years contributed
the larger portion of all the funds that
came into the treasury of the party
IS. The last decision of the Board Of
Supervision is unjust and Illegal, and we
call upon the Board of Supervision to
/ rpcpnci1ar tho SaDop