The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1901-08-24

Why Condemn All Labor Organisa-
lions Because One Violates Con-
tracte-For the same Reason, why
Not Condemn All Employers Re-
cause Some Cheat Their Creditors,
and Violate the Lawss
A number Of trade papers have re-
Gently published editorials which were
unfair to union labor, though
none Of them could perhaps be called
unfriendly.
Not being in touch with the labor
movement, it is difficult for the editors
to distinguish what peculiarities Of
conduct are due to trade unionism, and
what to ordinary humanity. Human
beings, whether organized workers.,
trade unionists, or employers of labor,
are not always honorable in their deal
lngs as law abiding citizens. There are
manufacturers who work their en-
ployers contrary to law on holidays,
some who evade the law on the employ
ment Of women and minors. many who
deliberately break agreements with
their employees and others with whom
they have dealings. There are some
who have cheated their creditors, and
even a few who have set fire to their
property In order to collect the insur-
ance. Because some manufacturers
have done these these things it would
be unreasonable to blame manufactur-
ers in general for it. So it Is unreason-
able to charge labor unions generally,
either directly or by implication, with
what a very small percentage Of their
members may have done.
Trade unions do not believe in vio-
lence. Nohing of the kind is heard OF
in the best organized trades. There are
When there are strike riots it is due to
the work of outsiders, and it always
happens in trades which, by their nat
ure, it is hard to organize we'll and
when the members are Inot we'll posted
in trade-union methods. The workers
in all well-organized trades have rene
dies far more powerful for their griev-
ances that the use of violence, and the
leaders know and urge their use, and
are not only in favor of violence, but
strongly opposed to it, and say so re-
peatedly. but they can't put all their
time in saying 50 any more than
manufacturer could afford to put all his
time in denouncing fraudulent debtors.
And trade unionists do believe In keep
ing agreements, sometimes even when
these agreements hav been obtained by
fraud.
One well-known shoe manufactured
was frank enough to tell union agent
that he intended to break the agree
ment he had made with him. While
such frankness is very rare, the break
ing OF agreements by manufacturers is
less so. Only this year, well-known
Haverhill firm broke its agreement
with the local union to pay certain
prices for labor and made secret prices
with q number Of it's employees, after
wards being compelled to refund the
money. The facts were published in
the newspapers at the time. But this
Of manufacturers are not to be trusted.
AS in business there are responsible
and irresponsible labor unions. Large
firms are generally responsible; large
unions generally are. They could not
afford to be otherwise even If it suited
the inclinations and character Of their
managers and offrcf:se
managers and officers. l
A peculiar illustration Of the respon-
sibility of a great trade-union occurred
in England: A ship was in dock being
repaired. It was needed in hurry,
and this fact coming to the knowledge
Of tae workers engaged upon it, they
conceived the idea Of taking advantage
Of their employers extreme necessity
to force a raise in the rate Of payment,
Notwithstanding an agreement already
existing for a fixed rate. The workmen
went out on strike. The firm immedi-
ately telegraphed to the general off,
Gals of the union. The officers tele-
graphed back Immediately to put the
men to work at the prices they required
and the extra amount paid to the work.
men in excess would be paid back to
the Arm out Of the treasury of the
national union; also, for the firm to
keep an account Of the amount over
paid to each Individual. The firm did
so. The union paid the extra amount
charged out of its treasury, and then
collected from he1workmen Individual
ly just the amount in wages each Of
them secured over the amount he was
entitled to.
OF course, it required a strong Or
ganization to do this thing in this
peculiar way, but the general organ:-
cation will in nine hundred and nine
ty-nine cases out Of q thousand stand
by their agreements, and this is surely
as much as can be said for any class
Of men.
The trouble with many critics Of labor
organization is that they generally Sc
lect for criticism bodies Of workingmen
who can hardly be called organised at
all; men who get together temporarily
on impulse, who demand something
and fall out again. In this way they
shout at the wrong party. They rail at
organised labor generally for. the doines
Of disorganized labor or labor in the
first stages Of organization. It would
be Just as reasonable to rail at civiliza-
ton and organised government because