The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1894-07-31


Brotherhood of Railway Telegraphers,
perhaps the most important branch of
| railroad workmen, but competent op-
orators were to be found at every cross
roads and the whole thing came to a
disastrous close and practically killed
that brotherhood.
The strikes of the presnt year that
are over are matters too recent to
need any comment, that of the miners
being the most important. They have
furnished an opportunity for two asses
claiming to be men of sense and gov
errors of important States to show
their teeth and bring ridicule on their
states. Comment on the present
railroad strike would be out of place
now. The loss will amount to mill
lions; very much of it will fall on peo-
pie in no way involved in the quarrel.
So far as can be seen the men on the
| s. p. have no cause at all for their
strike, and are not supported by pub
| lie opinion in California, which is
equivalent to saying that they will
lose their point. If the truth could be
known it would be found that 10000
of the $4,000 men involved were OPP
posed to the strike, and even now
more than half would vote to return
to work if they had an opportunity
and dared. Yet one man says quit,
and they obey, against what they
know to be their own interest. We
will venture the prophecy that the
roads will all be running by the
close of the month, if they are not
already doing so at this date. We
will also predict that just as soon as
the men see the beginning of the end
they will commence rioting and ap-
plying the torch to property without
any regard to the ownership. Such
has been the history of all past strikes
in late years.
The one strike of all others that
brings out the question from all
points, and for violence, and for in
volying a great number of men in
small scope of territory, was the re
cent Homestead strike, which COM
meuced in reality in 1888 in the Edgar
Thompson Steel Works at Braddock,
5000 men remaining out four months
and losing their point and $3.50, 200 in
wages. In 1890 the puddlers struck
and returned to work short $4,000 in
wages. Then followed the Homestead
strike, the most i'll advised and most
disastrous to the cause of labor OF any
strike of the century, up to the pres
ent time. They were getting better
wages than any similar body of men
in the world. a majority OF them
were getting more than the majority
of teachers, preachers or clerks, and
more than the average farmer was
making on a farm worth $4,000 to
$4,000. Many owned their own
homes and had money laid away.
The proposed reduction applied to
only 800 men out of $500. Common
unskilled labor was paid Sl.40 to S1.70
for eight hours work. Yet $500 men
must stop work, riot, commit murder
and land in prison for long terms to
help 800 get more money. What logic
The fatal weakness of the movement
was in striking when they had SO
little reason for complaint and
so many reasons for contentment and
happiness. The fact that men work
with their hands instead of with their
brains is not enough to insure public
sympathy, for all men must and do
work with one or the other. There
are two sides to labor troubles, but
many people claim they can see but
one, which is usually the one where
self-interest rests. 1t is conceded
that workmen have perfect right to
quit work whenever they wish to do
so. 1t they should all quit at given
time and thus bring on a strike they
still are in the right. Just at this
point is where the road forks. Has
not the employer the same right to
dispense with the services of a work
man when he is dissatisfied? Labor
organizations claim not. Common
sense says yes. That is the new prin-
ciple recently introduced into strikes.
That was the situation at Homestead,
Buffalo and now at Pullman and
on the Southern Pacific. The men
did not merely quit work but insisted
that they should be re-employed I'M
der new conditions of their own max
ing, or that no one else should be en-
pioyed. By rights they have no
more claim on The company after they
quit work than any other person
seeking employment in the same
shops. The men who go there to
take their places are there of right
and are on an equal footing with
them. They in fact declared that the
mills belonged to them and should not
be operated except according to their
wishes, notion that found some
favor in the Senate of the United
States, unfortunately for the good
sense of one or two Senators. This
novel claim was first advanced in
the Homestead strike, but gained
but little popular opinion in its favor,
Notwithstanding Senator Palmer stood
sponsor for it. The logical conse-
quences would lead to anarchy, and
the average American does not believe
that anarchy is the solution of the
labor or or any other question. 1t is
certainly absurd to say that the men
have become part owners OF mills or
railroads by reason of their services
as employees. They are paid an agreed
price for their labor, and they get it,
whether the mill or road pays or not.
Their claims are discharged when they
get their money. When a planter
employs men to help him raise crop
of sugar cane, they do not acquire a
vested right or interest in his sugar or
the land it was grown on. If he makes
anything, all right, and if be loses, as
many do, no one would ever think of
asking the laborer to return part of
his wages to help out. Labor is like
everything else, it is worth just what
\ a