The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-08-21
Indianapolis Manufactures Has No De-
sire for Discussion with President
of Labor Federation.
GIVES HIS REASONS IN LETTER
SAYS DEBATE WOULD NOT RESULT IN
BETTER UNDERSTANDING.
Boycott Denounced as PalpabIe Viola
ton of Laws Guaranteeing In
diyiduaI Freedom.

by the Labor day committee from ID. NJ
Parry. stating the futility of a conference
with the view of arranging a debate be-
tween Mr.. Parry and Samuel Gompers,
president of the American Federation of
Labor the committee will probably take no
further steps towards bringing the two men
together. Mr.. Parry states in his letter
that it would be utterly useless to hold a
conference as he will not consider pro-
position to meet Mr.. GOmpers on Labor day.
In his somewhat lengthy letter he gives
his reason and also takes advantage of the
occasion to express himself in regard to the
unions.
Mr. Parrys letter was written in reply TO
a letter from Andrew c. Hansen, MEM
Der of the Labor day committee, asking that
Mr.. Parry set aside night to meet the
committee and discuss the proposition. The
letter of Mr.. Parry follows:
Mr.. Andrew c. Hansen, Care of Indian
apois Commercial Reporter, City:
Dear Sir-Replying to your favor of the
18th i wish to assure you that II WOULD
afford me pleasure to meet you and your
committee any evening you may choose at
my country residence, Golden Hill, wnlcn Is
but short walk north of Armstrong Park
But it is only proper that l should tell you
that / must diSappoint you in the object OF
your visit. While appreciating the kindly
spirit of your letter 1 must at the same
time politely but positively decline to par
ticipate i'm any joint debate with MI
Gompers.
You say in your letter that it is important
that capital and labor should come To some
better understanding, and L quite agree
with you on the proposition but | must take
exception to your conclusion that the pro-
posed debate would further the end desired.
As you are aware, Mr.: Gompers mas issued
a boycott against my business and has an
nounced that he intends to cause STRIFE
among my employees. AS members OF or
ganized labor you are now under orders 10
do everything in your power 10 rum me
financially and to drive out of employment
the men who at present earning an
honest livelihood at the Parry factory. what
offense have L committed that i should
merit such intended punishment, and how
comes Ii that an organization or citizens
should infiict this punishment instead OF the
duly accredited representatives or the law {!
The oStenSlble reason assigned by your lead
ers arises from my giving a poor painter
who was out of work the chance of earning
a little money by painting the steps OF my
residence. The amount agreed upon lor
the service quite satisfactory to the
man employed, but II appears tnat the
ubiquitous walking delegate discovered that
ii was less than the union scale or painters.
REAL REASON FOR BOYCOTT.
Your leaders thereupon took the ground
that ii was better for the man and his
family TO starve than TO work for some
thing less than the union scale and thus
it came about that for the offense of Civ
ing "A man an odd job of painting some
steps-that, by the way, were really not
suffering particularly for paint-the firm
of which L am the head, and which had
nothing whatever to do with the matter,
is now advertised by Mr.. Compress or
ders as unfair which, translated,
means that anyone who sells it raw ma
terial or purchases its product does so at
the risk of being himself boycotted. But
while this little painting job Is the oSten-
sible reason and even such 1t is a
mighty poor one. the real reason for my
falling under the disfavor OF organized
labor is that l have exercised my Ameri-
can privilege of expressing my opinions
as to methods pursued by organized labor,
which methods / have on occasion not
hesitated TO denounce as lawless and sub
versive of our form OF government.
assure you, gentlemen, as falr-minded
men, which you appear to be, TO judge
from your letter, | am not opposed 10
any organization of workmen that have
lawful purposes and live up to them. But
it must be remembered that organizations
like individuals have a right to perfect
freedom of action only so long as they do
not infringe upon the rights of others.
j have not the least doubt that if your
unions would realize this truth and would
seek to enhance the proficiency of the men,
bers and would teach the idea that the in
terests of their employers were their own in
tereStS, Iney cOulO dCCOUpllSu d WOflu VI
good for the cause of labor. But so long
as you follow the advice of men who earn
the salaries you pay them by stirring up
strife and embittering your minds against
energy and thought toward furnishing you
honest employment. just so long will this
industrial warfare continue. L believe that
| am truer friend or labor than the man
who would lead you into taking the bread
out of the mouths of the men that work
for me.
and l have never ceaced to work from
that time to this, and 1t is mistake TO
assume that / do not sympathize with any
man who earns an honest livelihood, his
work howsoever humble. But in my
opinion ii is a grievous error that any or
ganization makes when it resorts to pal
| pable violations of the laws which guar
| antee the freedom of the individual in
| this country. Once destroy the right OF
| every man TO do as he peases with his
own so long he does not infringe upon
the rights of others, and the most precious
possession of the poor man Will have been
| wrested from him, a possession that has
been bequeathed to him at the cost of CEN
| turtles of bloody strife. While | might cite
! unions have overstepped constitutional
| rights in this country, yet IL is sufficient
| to call your attention to the designs per-
| tanning to myself or the man with whom
| you ask me TO debate.
| He has officially announced that 1 shall
| be ruined and this simply because 1 have
| exercised my right 10 freedom or opinion
| and while il is true he cannot in anywist
| injure my business by his efforts, yet the
| intent Is there and he would il he could
! Do YOU really think that any good END
| could be subserved by a debate between
! him and me? | have expressed my opin-
| ions in several recent addresses and he
has expressed his. l will probably express
my opinions on occasions in the future and
! he will likely do the same. There is there.
/ fore no occasion for a joint debate ever
| though there were no personal objection OIL
| my part TO occupying the same platform
| with a man who has sinister and lawless
| designs against me.
Allow me again TO say that / will gladly
meet your committee any evening at any
/ time.
With kind regards to yourself personal
/ IN and the members of your committee,
am yours very truly, ID. N. PARRY.