The Republican journal., 1892-08-18

the past two months | have searched the
newspapers in vain for an impartial state
ment of the existing trouble between the
contractors and granite cutters of New
England. 1t seems to me that some one
might be found whose facile pen and good
common sense could give an unbiased ver
dict upon the merits of the issue. hope
you will publish the few ideas that follow,
without in anyway committing your valu-
able paper to the support of either party
in the contest, but as the honest judgment
of dsnterested observer whose success
in life does not at all depend upon the
victory of either side, and who would like
to see fair play and good counsel prevail.
In the first place, let us see what the
question is that has set at variance ten
thousand workmen and four hundred EN-
ployers. 1t is ostensibly whether bill of
wages shall be signed on January list, or
on May LIST. The workmen maintain that
beginning a bill Of wages on January LIST
they would place themselves at the mercy
of their employers, who, at such dull
season, could force down the scale to Il
minimum in fact to starvation prices.
ON the other hand, the contractors
maintain that their contracts are mostly
signed early in the year. and that they
cannot intelligently nor safely bid on any
job until they know what wages they
must pay to get it done.
SO, in order to settle this momentous
question, a lockout occurred, throwing
out of employmenta large majority of the
stone cutters of New England.
The workmen, however, further main
tain that the statement concerning the
time of contracts is untrue, and that most
contracts are signed about June LIST and
not January LIST; and that they,in general,
are as well acquainted with the time and
terms OF the contracts as the contractors
themselves; that the contractors desire to
find out how much they must pay for Ia
Dor, and then to bid high and thus have
large margin of profits for themselves;
that by destructive competition the con-
tract prices are forced down to the lowest
figures possible, and the workmen must
suffer in consequences that large sums go
into the pockets of dishonest BOSSES"
| which should swell the wages of the hon
est workman if the business was rightly
conducted: and finally that the contrac-
tors are trying, by the employment of for
eiyners and other cheap laborers, to make
slaves of the cutters, OF at least to reduce
their wages to a bare living rate.
Now, if all these charges are true (and
no doubt some are), what shall be said of
the employers? They are certainly the
most untnlthful, avaricious, unbusiness-
| like and cruel Of men, No doubt but that
each of the foregoing charges is in a meas
ure true; that contracts are made at all
times of the year; that the workmcn know
much more than formerly of their en-
ployers' business that the contractors de-
sire to make all they are able out of their
contracts; that competition lowers tie
prices of Jobs: that there are dishonest
''bosses:' and that many contractors are
very unjust. But is that all the truth?
As to untruthfulness. avarice. dishonesty
and cruelty, all good men must deprecate
them, as well in contractors as in stone
cutters; and when, as has been the case in
many granite yards. the employers have
reaped large gains and have paid low
wages, have employed unjust overseers,
and lied about their contracts. there is no
excuse that they can offer to condone their
otfenses. But to say that all employers
are such men is no more Just than to say
that all workmen are tramps, or desire
high wages for poor work.
Secondly, we may ask what precipitated
the trouble? On May 18th there was post
ed in the yards belonging to the members
of the Manufacturers Association the fol-
lowing notice:
"All employed OH, members OF Ia
Dor organizations are requested to sus-
pend their labor on said-on Satur-
day the 18th inst, until matters between
the several labor organizations and the
New England Manufacturers Association
are amicably settled
The animus OF this notice is very plain.
Whatever the pretended motives may be,
it is clear that the real motive was to
break the union organization. 1t was SO
interpreted by all the workmen, and the
battle was at once begun with full knowl
edge of the cost that it would entail and
the bitterness that it would engender and
foster. Ii the Association should win
then the power of the Union would be
broken. but if the Union should win
the Association would be obliged to sign
the bill of wages at the time demanded,
and wait for a filter season to carry out it's
plans.
We will not stop to question the wisdom
of this step, but all engaged must have
foreseen the bitterness of the struggle.
Whether victory for either side will repay
the losses, OF help to establish more
equitable relations between employer and
workmen is certainly doubtful. l think
that it would he acknowledged by all
members of the Union that if no union